Re: Header compression: header set diff

James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Thu, 21 March 2013 19:54 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 46FE421F8C9B for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 12:54:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.648
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.648 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.950, 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 Sbzo3vuwoF+5 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 12:54:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5ECF921F8B58 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 12:54:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UIlYc-0002G5-Cp for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 19:53:50 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 19:53:50 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UIlYc-0002G5-Cp@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <jasnell@gmail.com>) id 1UIlYR-0002Bh-Ko for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 19:53:39 +0000
Received: from mail-ob0-f169.google.com ([209.85.214.169]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <jasnell@gmail.com>) id 1UIlYQ-0006wx-NY for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 19:53:39 +0000
Received: by mail-ob0-f169.google.com with SMTP id oi10so2036490obb.0 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 12:53:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=jj7r+mztKlrj9i+/xwGidVHzCWQJaVG+Y0S665GIVew=; b=AfBdj0Ao8ybieuOGXOn/DrRKzmkjONRgDhcz/wtelViF5bP6NSiXC2hBTMFEkVgXpc vmyeUQ1yycPgF4CM70QXYAY3hO/rlOsmjkmgPD1+ywIAjB1e2VEszzIfVLbqPA8pq0dF 4ibxfGXKYf03HEqw4wEnpJESrRjwTvTVSUYoH2m65b1h3dWDjUGl0yvHSGFu8AJKzrMr ovzPbMtQSPSncGrZQjHW4ukrYCViTrLeyU2A9i+7OsLWXDtMso44xcQ2a8NRJ/8/OcaS dVAj3DOpXdI6KZd3oAXHtZICinu01lAzyMEWPXaIwy2XK/3stIRSXZj7q/nM8R2eNjt/ gCIw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.20.225 with SMTP id q1mr7621207oee.31.1363895592582; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 12:53:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.60.23.193 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 12:53:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.60.23.193 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 12:53:12 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAOdDvNq8K52L1rOF8GR7pi4VDx+fOshO=Co7O+0YQTGUL9XMZw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6C71876BDCCD01488E70A2399529D5E5163F39CB@ADELE.crf.canon.fr> <CAOdDvNq8K52L1rOF8GR7pi4VDx+fOshO=Co7O+0YQTGUL9XMZw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 12:53:12 -0700
Message-ID: <CABP7RbfCyK8EFHt7g2s+uFhQHHPs3tv=2eunJ8rYDYgz2p=wmw@mail.gmail.com>
From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
To: Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org, RUELLAN Herve <Herve.Ruellan@crf.canon.fr>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="e89a8ff1c1fc4ed8bb04d874b0cf"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.214.169; envelope-from=jasnell@gmail.com; helo=mail-ob0-f169.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.707, 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 1UIlYQ-0006wx-NY 0e21c88713a897a83f5cc88c44940f16
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Header compression: header set diff
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CABP7RbfCyK8EFHt7g2s+uFhQHHPs3tv=2eunJ8rYDYgz2p=wmw@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/17103
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>

+1.. In addition to this,  response headers tend to be significantly more
variable than request headers...  Which,  of course means much lower
compression ratios anyway if we're talking about delta based mechanisms.
It makes very little sense to optimize for the response side.
On Mar 21, 2013 6:14 AM, "Patrick McManus" <pmcmanus@mozilla.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 8:50 AM, RUELLAN Herve
> <Herve.Ruellan@crf.canon.fr> wrote:
>
> > To better understand the impact of this choice of persisting the header
> set, we tested it inside HeaderDiff and saw a slight improvement of
> compaction for requests but also a slight(er) decrease of compaction for
> responses.
>
> All else being equal (which is of course never true), compression
> ratio of requests is more important than responses because the MUX
> allows multiple requests to fit inside the cwnd (and thus avoid
> scaling by rtt). The better the ratio, the greater the number of
> transactions in 1-flight-mux. On the response side the headers are
> mixed in with data frames which in many (but not all) scenarios
> overhwelm the headers on a byte count basis - so the effect of header
> compression is less likely to impact congestion control.
>
>