Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns
Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com> Fri, 12 July 2013 16:37 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 3628111E8127 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:37:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.547
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.547 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.051, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 5MhrFNJpNMv2 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:37:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA5B011E811A for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:37:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UxgLA-0001v8-Nl for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 16:37:04 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 16:37:04 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UxgLA-0001v8-Nl@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <grmocg@gmail.com>) id 1UxgL2-0000wy-K5 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 16:36:56 +0000
Received: from mail-oa0-f53.google.com ([209.85.219.53]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <grmocg@gmail.com>) id 1UxgL1-0008Ot-Oq for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 16:36:56 +0000
Received: by mail-oa0-f53.google.com with SMTP id k14so13002183oag.40 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:36:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=6lA8npsUeAWvTTt0vZYRgJCgnBzK1HLGWNHrshtswts=; b=OxMHkyrQ7YXXigewgs4s9zCXtJO8K+X8rxyUHGXFHePXo/rjiEBLO4kp9eKQlFZCo4 b2cO+/tOiYl0khHJuawWXFq69UDbL6OlZBXpf3pwpDLzFCtS9WOPmW3a8VlXPu2MWV8Z qEiULR5XmuadcU8iWDMxu7o9utegK1EC+Zquv8xiGYxAsqWNFJ8nbYZdZTcpL9X2dfeZ 805v3Yzq8vOZTfhyxWlW3IiiDn1ac2mUKF9TTC8VA3dTkEUFPk6H2NfkXzH8+/9fCOQm m0YMRRNfisUT6KddUqQkkaODmTGYgDUlVvaJRHm+b861EyoG293QgZNFM7OtsW6o1peu AbTg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.27.74 with SMTP id r10mr36323772obg.63.1373646989534; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:36:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.76.91.229 with HTTP; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:36:29 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA+pLO_j__UQ+Jkbtd=YhNTPDxWwjDuJ367XZ_DtT9yv9oeXD8w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+qvzFPUpcm6kUtJx+rTw8Dpp4Gtx4Bmr3XPDhjNsjchUfN9_w@mail.gmail.com> <51DE1E32.9010801@treenet.co.nz> <CAP+FsNdcYhA=V5Z+zbt70b5e7WmcmXgjG5M9L3vfXeXfTwmRnw@mail.gmail.com> <51DE327C.7010901@treenet.co.nz> <CABkgnnXeqD6wh0dcJ1Dz=4PLAJNkDeGcCuzMr9ATd_7xS7nbGQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABP7RbcUkLf3CTAB4jwicnsiKWLGVY6=hX0k=0256SR_gcVt9A@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNcOZnLa9GCr6XcZNFdq-mSXG6Q-_1Lb5u=a2YyXNCsVfQ@mail.gmail.com> <51DFBDAB.9010505@treenet.co.nz> <CABaLYCs4KUXO2YwGyG07kbGJtrrfc7kVMJH3N_f=D-WQG86FcQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+pLO_j__UQ+Jkbtd=YhNTPDxWwjDuJ367XZ_DtT9yv9oeXD8w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:36:29 -0700
Message-ID: <CAP+FsNegXOn6qEo05+o-L32HEzTSu1xFs_diLF8ii_ycW9HnWA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
To: Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com>
Cc: Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com>, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, httpbis mailing list <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e01184b2edbad6604e1531c88"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.219.53; envelope-from=grmocg@gmail.com; helo=mail-oa0-f53.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.681, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1UxgL1-0008Ot-Oq 9f4049777976d70d598f5bd47b01f7d3
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAP+FsNegXOn6qEo05+o-L32HEzTSu1xFs_diLF8ii_ycW9HnWA@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/18730
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>
This was the first thing I experimented. :) It either requires two different state size settings, or it makes state size management .... interesting.... Having a single table made much more sense and was less complicated, especially for proxies. -=R On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 8:22 AM, Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 2:11 AM, Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com> wrote: > >> I'm also in favor of removing the compressor completely. >> > > So the compressor buys us the ability to share headers between streams and > possibly to reduce the size of the headers via some sort of encoding > (whether it's typed encodings, or huffman compressed strings, or varint > lengths, etc). So a dumb proposal: > > A HEADERS frame consists of encoded name values pairs, let's say varint > length followed by UTF-8 bytes of the string (we can argue over compressed > strings, types, etc. later, but basically no indexing into shared state). > > Sending a HEADERS frame on Stream-ID 0 creates a set of headers that gets > saved and added to the HEADERS frame that opens any streams after it is > sent. Sending a new HEADERS frame on Stream-ID 0 overwrites the previous > frame. > > This allows us to share Cookies, User-Agent, Host, etc. between requests, > but wouldn't allow for any response header sharing. It would allow us to > share headers for pushed responses since those are streams opened by the > server. > > >
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
- HTTP router point-of-view concerns Christian Parpart
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Amos Jeffries
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Roberto Peon
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Amos Jeffries
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Christian Parpart
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Amos Jeffries
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Michael Sweet
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Martin Thomson
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns James M Snell
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Sam Pullara
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Roberto Peon
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Roberto Peon
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Amos Jeffries
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Sam Pullara
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Patrick McManus
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Roberto Peon
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns James M Snell
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Roberto Peon
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns James M Snell
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Roberto Peon
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Sam Pullara
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Roberto Peon
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Martin Thomson
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Mark Nottingham
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Mike Belshe
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Gábor Molnár
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Gábor Molnár
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Michael Sweet
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Christian Parpart
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Willy Tarreau
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Patrick McManus
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Jeff Pinner
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Martin Thomson
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Roberto Peon
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Ludin, Stephen
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Roberto Peon
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns James M Snell
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Amos Jeffries
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Amos Jeffries
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Roberto Peon
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Yoav Nir
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Willy Tarreau
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Willy Tarreau
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Sam Pullara
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Willy Tarreau
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Mark Delany
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Willy Tarreau
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Willy Tarreau
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Willy Tarreau
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Yoav Nir
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Yoav Nir
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Willy Tarreau
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Stephen Farrell
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Willy Tarreau
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Sam Pullara
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Nicolas Mailhot
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Nicolas Mailhot
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Nicolas Mailhot
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Martin Nilsson
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Nico Williams
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Nico Williams
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Nico Williams
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns Nico Williams