IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Reference set in HPACK

Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com> Thu, 03 July 2014 01:18 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 (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46A741A0AFE for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 18:18:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.652
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.652 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, 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 MEScwk_4YqdK for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 18:18:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEDF91A0AF3 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 18:18:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1X2Ve8-0000kw-P3 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 03 Jul 2014 01:17:08 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2014 01:17:08 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1X2Ve8-0000kw-P3@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <grmocg@gmail.com>) id 1X2Ve3-0000j9-TC for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 03 Jul 2014 01:17:03 +0000
Received: from mail-ob0-f181.google.com ([209.85.214.181]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <grmocg@gmail.com>) id 1X2Ve3-0007rO-41 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 03 Jul 2014 01:17:03 +0000
Received: by mail-ob0-f181.google.com with SMTP id wp4so13357104obc.12 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 18:16:37 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=/RaTPIzukawPw8ktXySFKFiDp+NfxtgsPjfMbUalgg8=; b=kAuevaXMpCaLkmGXmt6Uc0CSeC81zq45JvfJL9QSnm/O46AwAP6E/XrYWVAZsftfzO l7v5d9A7IbJDYeQaQSTNVD29dSzJ2CSkU7/fEnWU4FHp8nYaZCp+vrcMf7PeOBkbtjFC Unx91DLgTNK9WJuW6czuJGo+fNIo0CYHy0r9Tkk12yvTVxGctUzdGSq4KrzZ5yyoIdYv WpiufhltyUq9WFhJsZh8La1zdy4qTMIPAh1ASqF0i25mlYLJNhZcvs281b+Lc3Sn6iIP zLK8w9gUckcfrlf4oXJ56BeN0WIFaL2JlNs1vCeKqOfW/tgYe3tNlhSqNO+zNSgm9yit eMQw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.176.225 with SMTP id cl1mr1431496oec.36.1404350197247; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 18:16:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.76.108.12 with HTTP; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 18:16:37 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20140702185439.18d4b5979afd32a766323ba8@bisonsystems.net>
References: <20140702.143041.283993814131065692.kazu@iij.ad.jp> <CAP+FsNexzVzt+YV7oBeMdGrMoajbMVj1Z90XvQfaCuNMDjYdHg@mail.gmail.com> <20140702.145215.1023037072984695261.kazu@iij.ad.jp> <CAP+FsNc+xW1gKma0McrgXtPpwR0BCubHkvHhUbcHHyn1Sd6t0g@mail.gmail.com> <19403.1404282862@critter.freebsd.dk> <CAP+FsNf=RvMaGLr2Dx+VUVwimb6+bxdEgNyV7aL2xPOiFBJcGg@mail.gmail.com> <19819.1404285745@critter.freebsd.dk> <CAP+FsNc9Te7fzTEeKyqWJEAXg6CW9WEGu9qDAQv6c0UP91O+1w@mail.gmail.com> <20140702185439.18d4b5979afd32a766323ba8@bisonsystems.net>
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2014 18:16:37 -0700
Message-ID: <CAP+FsNcrD0pe=OmrFdk7BebdNjqs28=0LNfqHwxL77NN+UCwCw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
To: "Eric J. Bowman" <eric@bisonsystems.net>
Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, Kazu Yamamoto <kazu@iij.ad.jp>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7bd75e64a5b51804fd3fc232"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.214.181; envelope-from=grmocg@gmail.com; helo=mail-ob0-f181.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 1X2Ve3-0007rO-41 28a8086e91b25adc372bfe60c465d970
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Reference set in HPACK
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAP+FsNcrD0pe=OmrFdk7BebdNjqs28=0LNfqHwxL77NN+UCwCw@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/25204
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>

You can cache an object that has inlined resources within it, but you
cannot cache those resources separately.
You can't cache a resource that doesn't have a name.

-=R


On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 5:54 PM, Eric J. Bowman <eric@bisonsystems.net>
wrote:

> Roberto Peon wrote:
> >
> > Inlining is the technique most often used to reduce the number of
> > request.
> >
>
> I've also always considered it a worthwhile technique for byte-shaving,
> as combining lots of small images into one mosaic image eliminates
> whatever redundant bytes are inherent to the chosen image format.
>
> >
> > It is a strategy that works well most of the time for cold
> > pageloads, but it also harms latency for subsequent navigations
> > deeper into the site as those resources cannot be cached.
> >
>
> But you lost me there, as I've never had a problem caching those
> resources? Or does "inlining" not mean what I think it means?
>
> -Eric
>

v2.29.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status