IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Call for Adoption: TCP Tuning for HTTP

Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 02 March 2016 08:04 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@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 (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3977C1A894E for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 00:04:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.008
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.008 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.006, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RviQdjL7UfAC for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 00:04:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 010451A893B for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 00:04:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1ab1h8-00089x-46 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2016 07:59:42 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2016 07:59:42 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1ab1h8-00089x-46@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>) id 1ab1h0-00088r-Ho for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2016 07:59:34 +0000
Received: from mail-ig0-f177.google.com ([209.85.213.177]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>) id 1ab1gy-0002tQ-FD for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2016 07:59:33 +0000
Received: by mail-ig0-f177.google.com with SMTP id y8so39684540igp.0 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 23:59:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=kaFgkDYmGUrdgHOoeYfsKDFcuDc0ADP8wY8rPu+eZxU=; b=txZ2nKOXe+JeC4Wj6NPsI82sIBfR6YYSwX53fUmvJEjG7P1vGz5KhF8e0QXj4aD41c 8klZsUmuPZq4BsUdQglygyivdiWSLMqd50q0vkEfVxID5buY9JbCqqRp22FdaA0YXDCe EhceNiyu8Pc37zl7cFf02C3yDX+Bi0cOVgm6Jde1HzRHnlFHzhd5zShlLlM1FmVqt9Hp ORA5UI53a4VDe6nM0wxQfkDizaJgozC/Ru711ol+y2FOovhhik4s15D+W50owhiTyZVq ML7404ziexGciTkpRm9KzxUE/XVxGXSLuI32YN7sd3fWtw+2q+WrhVnQWd3Z2wVuOAAH SqkQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=kaFgkDYmGUrdgHOoeYfsKDFcuDc0ADP8wY8rPu+eZxU=; b=GtdcViMv/QOwuojXitLDaG8isC/WfuM+87rGkKhH8RgykiP+8OEr8YMud0wxFYmomz SC43RfM/ojUIOP4gqrCUiAMcU3sdr0Atq//ggoI7lP86FLrSfC09/VZ9yQ11S5LxgiJ2 0PfUmJkKV8CbpwKBfeRM5cIY5i687Wtbp8zbXZ7h3YPx+aWVSIBMrjVXVFiLaHLynqKx T/Wu7cw3lIpiFMh+eOR2QheV2AzhTG3vTP5uGuwvjvO6f5xJCPn64U0E9d0ywVwJ8nCJ SSivGfoVpaTI/UdLebjubuEgJLDUDtCFNjoPeM+ABjkzJ/FsrZ0/oGEigFMV9w9/bXiu juLw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJL0uVEnSo9RN9UC/qN8/bDgFk5fIH+fhalFANp4Ch/KmLyAa4/LU8A4xno2FnqJvg==
X-Received: by 10.50.156.35 with SMTP id wb3mr3376524igb.60.1456905545809; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 23:59:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from still.local (184-19-64-38.drr03.clbg.wv.frontiernet.net. [184.19.64.38]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id s38sm14317435ioe.33.2016.03.01.23.59.04 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 01 Mar 2016 23:59:04 -0800 (PST)
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
References: <1C279539-57D5-4624-A80A-0344565872DF@mnot.net>
From: Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6ddd68c6-bb7d-f90e-f312-56dbf81f7fff@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2016 02:59:03 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:46.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/46.0a2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1C279539-57D5-4624-A80A-0344565872DF@mnot.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.213.177; envelope-from=tjw.ietf@gmail.com; helo=mail-ig0-f177.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-0.817, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1ab1gy-0002tQ-FD c9db90516bae40939d888dd791c572b0
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Call for Adoption: TCP Tuning for HTTP
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/6ddd68c6-bb7d-f90e-f312-56dbf81f7fff@gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/31141
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 support this for adoption.

My only current comment is the draft currently does not seem to make any 
requirements (ala 2119).  When DNSOP revisited RFC5966 - DNS Transport 
over TCP - Implementation Requirements - last year
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-5966bis/

DNSOP was able to come to rough consensus on recommendations. I feel
httpbis can also come to such consensus.

I like BCP but I've gotten some pushback from my co-workers who feel 
it's too early in the /2 deployment for the best practices to be honed.

tim


On 3/2/16 12:46 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> [ copying Alison as our Transport Tech Advisor ]
>
> Daniel has kindly started a document about how HTTP uses TCP, both for /1 and /2:
>   <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-stenberg-httpbis-tcp>
>
> We haven't explicitly discussed this at a meeting, but I have heard interest in this topic from a variety of folks.
>
> What do people think about adopting this with a target of Best Current Practice?
>
> Please comment on-list.
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email