Re: [tcpm] TCP Tuning for HTTP - update

Jana Iyengar <jri@google.com> Sat, 03 September 2016 08:20 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 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 041FD12B018 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 3 Sep 2016 01:20:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.467
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.467 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 OK68WQLbj6pL for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 3 Sep 2016 01:20:46 -0700 (PDT)
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 C413B127A90 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Sat, 3 Sep 2016 01:20:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1bg68K-00020r-MK for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 03 Sep 2016 08:17:00 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1bg68K-00020r-MK@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 <ylafon@w3.org>) id 1bg68E-0001zZ-N7 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 03 Sep 2016 08:16:54 +0000
Received: from raoul.w3.org ([128.30.52.128]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ylafon@w3.org>) id 1bg68D-0001vx-Bk for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sat, 03 Sep 2016 08:16:54 +0000
Received: from platy.fdn.fr ([80.67.176.7] helo=[192.168.1.41]) by raoul.w3.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ylafon@w3.org>) id 1bg68C-000DgP-SC for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sat, 03 Sep 2016 08:16:53 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_3C239B68-8162-4FFE-AFFB-073DCF6E4B06"
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
From: Jana Iyengar <jri@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <781AFF22-3532-44A0-AB14-628FF86BE866@mnot.net>
Resent-From: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 20:06:15 +0000
Cc: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>, tcpm@ietf.org, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>, Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>
Resent-Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2016 10:16:50 +0200
Message-Id: <CAGD1bZaOj0wLNuwuDWmwxp76V_ZbDJ8A_DXFVT6dzDaDiQO-xA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Name-Md5: efe3dad792d606410c9cc49cedaffc94
References: <0CC24FC1-37E1-4125-9627-05726A9D9406@mnot.net> <7fa95741-ac58-3183-1b92-238bd4b4dae6@isi.edu> <5CD67877-19E3-4E79-BBF2-3E270343A378@mnot.net> <2197232f-10d7-28cb-fcc9-05bd495e3c22@isi.edu> <87D56B16-B091-4E9C-9B88-D136ED4BC819@mnot.net> <b1fe8ceb-c48c-8d89-1026-1fbed8d31d62@isi.edu> <FABCF238-A257-43F6-8F63-7F4CE6614115@mnot.net> <9eb63b81-a9bc-cb65-913a-d9a5af0d2fe2@isi.edu> <781AFF22-3532-44A0-AB14-628FF86BE866@mnot.net>
Resent-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: ALL_TRUSTED=-1, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.508, W3C_NW=0.5
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1bg68D-0001vx-Bk dd274f41405fbbbd2e811c6bd53775d2
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: [tcpm] TCP Tuning for HTTP - update
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAGD1bZaOj0wLNuwuDWmwxp76V_ZbDJ8A_DXFVT6dzDaDiQO-xA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/32374
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>

Mark,

[I have not have read the entire thread in detail, but responding to one question.]

I'd especially like to hear from other people in the TCP community; we've heard from Joe and Michael; do others share their opinions, or have another view?

Responding to this specific question: I think this document is useful. There's tremendous value in having a document that discusses protocol interactions, especially for the most important protocol interaction today (HTTP/TCP).  Pursuing this document as Informational makes complete sense, and is well within IETF norms.

Implementation notes/advice is actually quite a useful bit that traditionally shows up in appendices, but arguably it really doesn't matter where it shows up. It's valuable. I would remove specific APIs and instead talk about mechanisms that are common enough (remove setsockopt() and sysctls, but talk about Nagle, socket buffers, etc.) but there are a number of commonly deployed mechanisms that it makes sense to talk about them here. I would suggest that the document discuss important interactions from a browser's point of view as separate from those at a web server.

I am happy to review and suggest changes to the document, but I think it's a fine fit.

- jana