Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns

Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net> Sun, 14 July 2013 12:36 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 EA1FD21F9048 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 05:36:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 uqT0YEPq3ktB for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 05:36:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3F3821F8F4D for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 05:36:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UyLWZ-0003Kv-Ke for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 12:35:35 +0000
Resent-Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 12:35:35 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UyLWZ-0003Kv-Ke@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <gix-ietf-http-wg@m.gmane.org>) id 1UyLWQ-0003KC-NA for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 12:35:26 +0000
Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <gix-ietf-http-wg@m.gmane.org>) id 1UyLWP-0000SE-TX for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 12:35:26 +0000
Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <gix-ietf-http-wg@m.gmane.org>) id 1UyLW3-0001PT-Fw for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 14:35:03 +0200
Received: from sat78-8-88-174-226-208.fbx.proxad.net ([88.174.226.208]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 14:35:03 +0200
Received: from nicolas.mailhot by sat78-8-88-174-226-208.fbx.proxad.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 14:35:03 +0200
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
From: Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 12:34:47 +0000
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <loom.20130714T143153-432@post.gmane.org>
References: <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> <092D65A8-8CB7-419D-B6A4-77CAE40A0026@gmail.com> <3835.1373612286@critter.freebsd.dk> <CD9E163F-1225-4DA8-9982-8BDBD16B1051@mnot.net> <1772.1373629495@critter.freebsd.dk> <20130712125628.GC28893@1wt.eu> <51E03D17.5010801@treenet.co.nz> <20130712200049.GD32054@1wt.eu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: sea.gmane.org
User-Agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/)
X-Loom-IP: 88.174.226.208 (Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:22.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/22.0)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=80.91.229.3; envelope-from=gix-ietf-http-wg@m.gmane.org; helo=plane.gmane.org
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.3
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-0.993, BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.39, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1UyLWP-0000SE-TX b4766f5d80eab6a4265a019c3b01cb9b
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: HTTP router point-of-view concerns
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/loom.20130714T143153-432@post.gmane.org>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/18765
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>

Willy Tarreau <w <at> 1wt.eu> writes:

 
> A shard reference or session ID are two completely different things. A
> session ID comes from one referential. A shard reference indicates what
> referential to use. That's why a user-provided session ID cannot be used
> as a shard reference and prevents from scaling. I *do* use cookies exactly
> as you describe because it's the only way to scale, and have been doing so
> for almost a decade now. In a cookie, you can indicate the DC, the server,
> a location in a database, etc... Whatever you need to perform very fast
> access. You simply can't do that by learning massive amounts of randoms
> generated by clients.

Then have the ID set by the server in answer to the first client request
(and limit its size in the protocol so no one tries to push a cookie there)

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot