Re: Implementation Notes on Server Push

Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com> Wed, 15 May 2013 21:20 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EE3011E80D2 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 May 2013 14:20:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.982
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.982 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.994, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FRT_STOCK2=3.988, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 87JY9oRhoAm1 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 May 2013 14:20:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DFD111E80A3 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 15 May 2013 14:20:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1Ucj6X-0008CG-I7 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 15 May 2013 21:19:21 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 21:19:21 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1Ucj6X-0008CG-I7@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <patrick.ducksong@gmail.com>) id 1Ucj6K-0008B1-VJ for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 15 May 2013 21:19:08 +0000
Received: from mail-ob0-f174.google.com ([209.85.214.174]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <patrick.ducksong@gmail.com>) id 1Ucj6J-00056D-Nu for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 15 May 2013 21:19:08 +0000
Received: by mail-ob0-f174.google.com with SMTP id un3so2580176obb.5 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Wed, 15 May 2013 14:18:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=6b+iRmCDjN4XdbGxLOsltCVt+wpcS41N9o0meysKG4w=; b=jcyD/Au0kgpLnk1QrIHrEY8cJxdbz78CuK6bGQKGqaHgt1Rob2dj20fnTar/6jbeWK rNZ1n+BP/NkZsjHEjR3OSjMkapPLLDKm/Dd9JamqgFuPxmSDiD3T5SJ2wHbWfUkiflJ+ j7ftKxkLCQutshjg25RFWqfsBBLojlUxarTlX1JAc7+z4xnCsuuEVWeZVXqy21Do3Hd3 baBkNmDYJ+QYgLkx0/fbjkEIpoyn0qv7XxmamH2V71872F7+uM7aF50Wmfya3hM4DUOw ISHF+S3OA9mO3jBGgJCWY6j9/DwdS+JBDGuhnhIc5Uzkfbef+Np7ZM5S9xiRbLGTRkEg zhGw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.199.74 with SMTP id ji10mr18098906obc.62.1368652721473; Wed, 15 May 2013 14:18:41 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: patrick.ducksong@gmail.com
Received: by 10.76.13.193 with HTTP; Wed, 15 May 2013 14:18:41 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnVQgwaCHfqM7ihiQfzFv2+Xr_W7z-+BtwqHhwK=Ye=mhA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAOdDvNqXhG7+xbvBwctQCR4tZePKByw75SR5oBamXTymZa7myA@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnURhLU3RJnMDxwErELedAmGKWcVgkE+B+Pn6vR3oYjJ6A@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNcdAiK=Ddd1HTaYSuaTCj6OdKyQRCskuH2OZQ7um9TU6Q@mail.gmail.com> <CABP7RbftHeAQDiF7u8=nR-q0TVHYtHvSPUO+N48zJ=7Kj49fVQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnVQgwaCHfqM7ihiQfzFv2+Xr_W7z-+BtwqHhwK=Ye=mhA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 17:18:41 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 7uisyjfAwCGhVch8yXOYrdQxOCE
Message-ID: <CAOdDvNq4tU2=PTxiUca5i7v4e0jHBy20eCUJ-hbaW--1W6bEmg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Cc: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8ff1c02448e65904dcc84bd1
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.214.174; envelope-from=patrick.ducksong@gmail.com; helo=mail-ob0-f174.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.3
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.636, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_FRT_STOCK2=0.01
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1Ucj6J-00056D-Nu 16af1e5dbdde76a373ac989b1f572dfb
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Implementation Notes on Server Push
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAOdDvNq4tU2=PTxiUca5i7v4e0jHBy20eCUJ-hbaW--1W6bEmg@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/18008
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

I think this makes sense. Alternatively we could just add it as 4 bytes to
the (bi-directional) SYN_STREAM.

Even at its current 16 byte overhead using window_update its not a big deal
afaict, though separate settings for things that are logically quite
separate is more efficient and a good idea. I mostly mentioned it because I
was impressed that I didn't find a server unhappy with using a
window_update to grow the window to a value larger than default established
by SETTINGS.

Try doing the rough equivalent to TCP with setsockopt and SO_RECVBUF and
you will get decidedly inconsistent results.




On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>wrote;wrote:

> On 14 May 2013 18:24, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:
> > "Splitting the initial window" seems wrong to me. Of course, I don't
> > have a better suggestion at the moment, but if I did I'm not certain
> > it would be this ;-)
>
> Sorry, I wasn't clear enough.  That would be crazy-talk.  I meant to
> split the initial window size configuration items.  Rather than "my
> receive window starts at X", it will be "my receive window for
> odd-numbered streams is X but for even-numbered stream it is Y."
>