IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Proposal: New Frame Size Text (was: Re: Design Issue: Frame Size Items)

James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Mon, 13 May 2013 20:32 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 EB2EA21F8EFE for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 May 2013 13:32:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.565
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.565 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.033, 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 Cq6rtkYbuiyN for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 May 2013 13:32:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F79021F8E5B for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 13 May 2013 13:32:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UbzPY-0004aA-Uz for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 13 May 2013 20:31:56 +0000
Resent-Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 20:31:56 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UbzPY-0004aA-Uz@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 1UbzPO-0004ZQ-27 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 13 May 2013 20:31:46 +0000
Received: from mail-oa0-f51.google.com ([209.85.219.51]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <jasnell@gmail.com>) id 1UbzPJ-0004sF-Bu for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Mon, 13 May 2013 20:31:46 +0000
Received: by mail-oa0-f51.google.com with SMTP id f4so8119649oah.38 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Mon, 13 May 2013 13:31:15 -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=W2t9Sn6VfxB1lz3pVflWCrdCQFZ6LZYMLTiXuR+qgtA=; b=xlJSv+sHsQqTQ2CD8DkdXkmIVUAfLphtj7hfhpFLReNM/v14ge0ayKC7u8cTUn+NQz zZEMmTrPAujybGh/iEtyy0B+fIxGkGMoJ6iSq/eeYz9tLVEXKMp6zjyK+ITn+MfVT3zs WV+mS8F2fSL4AvVFejPKy1qM/7ATcNeEUcu+r+hq/2DVojm8FTVsztn3/QANNpuQ8Hij J1WhJwwOju8JurDSZxWX5VGuL9a93TDaCPT6pea7vOWgsYIeWFTKOlekMTTqGG1Qjzz7 PMwOG/m70eybC4vQcq3HmqHCjDGsOrk7Lr1brivgoop3Xal8DQuFPDHC+COYEC8R/Sz1 9XUw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.92.230 with SMTP id cp6mr14214832oeb.91.1368477075479; Mon, 13 May 2013 13:31:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.60.3.137 with HTTP; Mon, 13 May 2013 13:31:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.60.3.137 with HTTP; Mon, 13 May 2013 13:31:15 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <57675.1368476865@critter.freebsd.dk>
References: <CABP7RbcfTjN5QFFuGm-P-rQMpAR3FGSC58WCy3qKn+29YCjn+w@mail.gmail.com> <CAA4WUYiwNSzvrY1LF_Sex_82TSDwMbTvYqo7LyKfBAOu0j4pfQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABP7RbdqnH0JK-UaMiaR5rLvZo8txywEcXXSUXa_y95hrLC5yA@mail.gmail.com> <CABP7Rbd-VfTFYurZ-JEKjHKOeKvZCKoYLGMXf+0mi-_wbdKYqA@mail.gmail.com> <CAA4WUYgfu=rcji-bdxNPsE9KCE4T67+vN9b0iojnvycx5R-StA@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnX=AemYGrBzWGX1VEUgKKrk+hR6YV0jg9qVMSdPiimBAA@mail.gmail.com> <CAFA1p16FHaSf7b1=mhe_Cb=ZqV1m0HVwkQNdW+pkJ0OkA9L-5A@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNdifoF3aqQLB-EZjYqL3O2_uNEmNJ_+zAktu9zapKmT7w@mail.gmail.com> <CABP7RbcF3VXuhvP5StN9hHVj4K-2WMvBr37ur3iHmH-=2WAbHw@mail.gmail.com> <CAA4WUYgFccqU5-65mFPF_3i4OOROZQCdS+tEUeDMk4HP4JJX5Q@mail.gmail.com> <CABP7RbcQMEhu9ciuTQoR1dRw3UiUB=E_AeMjaNrhFgMPmmi+EQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAA4WUYjFgJ28O5Jb58a5eodJMWe+CSe18Ow1wpETWJcjmedXRQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABP7RbdnnCiDSDt5CwPfRYx-BGgz8eoMUDa2J4xaWztHkCbe+w@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNfHEUsdqQaAg8-g6vLb=AikHQG4Y5BywJ2w1FQEon+LrQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAA4WUYijhOjJ1fo7VhUD6ezsOGO9P5q9M=q_p8J3CiDawG3bjg@mail.gmail.com> <57675.1368476865@critter.freebsd.dk>
Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 13:31:15 -0700
Message-ID: <CABP7RbfBuCtLpR7Y2Zz9o4m2BPLeoz9pwGYjmavx=D8uciKVPg@mail.gmail.com>
From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc: "ChanWilliam(陈智昌)" <willchan@chromium.org>, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, Hasan Khalil <hkhalil@google.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7b33cf0ef7a49204dc9f65e6"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.219.51; envelope-from=jasnell@gmail.com; helo=mail-oa0-f51.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-1.753, BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 1UbzPJ-0004sF-Bu d3ba20dce15bf9e329a4b0761af4266e
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Proposal: New Frame Size Text (was: Re: Design Issue: Frame Size Items)
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CABP7RbfBuCtLpR7Y2Zz9o4m2BPLeoz9pwGYjmavx=D8uciKVPg@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/17973
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>

PHK,  can you please clarify what you mean when you say "current proposal".
Do you mean the current spec as a whole or my specific change proposal
re:frame size.
On May 13, 2013 1:27 PM, "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:

> In message <CAA4WUYijhOjJ1fo7VhUD6ezsOGO9P5q9M=
> q_p8J3CiDawG3bjg@mail.gmail.com>
> , =?UTF-8?B?V2lsbGlhbSBDaGFuICjpmYjmmbrmmIwp?= writes:
>
> >I'd like to see a
> >proxy/server implementer (PHK has already voiced some support) champion
> >this.
>
> Well, sorry to disappoint you, but I'm down to trying to reduce the
> damage where and if I can.
>
> The current proposal is about as far away form how I would like to
> see HTTP/2.0 look as it can be:  Speculative, Complex, far too many
> parameters and not in any way streamlined for high-speed hardware
> based routing and processing.
>
> In other words: The archetypical result of engineering by committee
> to solve yesterdays problems.
>
>
> --
> Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
> phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
> FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
> Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email