Re: Submitted new I-D: Cache Digests for HTTP/2

Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com> Sun, 10 January 2016 19:42 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 DF7E31ACED2 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 11:42:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.903
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.903 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, 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 X3yPklxR_1rJ for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 11:42:17 -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 8F0701ACED4 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 11:42:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1aILnq-0001EP-CJ for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 19:37:26 +0000
Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 19:37:26 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1aILnq-0001EP-CJ@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 <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>) id 1aILnm-0001DU-Es for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 19:37:22 +0000
Received: from mail.measurement-factory.com ([104.237.131.42]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>) id 1aILnk-0008J3-6x for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 19:37:21 +0000
Received: from [65.102.233.169] (unknown [65.102.233.169]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.measurement-factory.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 44181E06A; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 19:36:55 +0000 (UTC)
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
References: <CAAMqGzYUoCMxBxUEY9wfLOHZp7nrO4d1q5JZo=96pfEbVS1-ew@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>
X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110
Cc: Alcides Viamontes E <alcidesv@zunzun.se>
Message-ID: <5692B2C8.1020308@measurement-factory.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 12:36:40 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAAMqGzYUoCMxBxUEY9wfLOHZp7nrO4d1q5JZo=96pfEbVS1-ew@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=104.237.131.42; envelope-from=rousskov@measurement-factory.com; helo=mail.measurement-factory.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-1.499, BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1aILnk-0008J3-6x 53267e5b8848d0724e14599e729963f6
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Submitted new I-D: Cache Digests for HTTP/2
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/5692B2C8.1020308@measurement-factory.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/30878
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>

On 01/10/2016 10:11 AM, Alcides Viamontes E wrote:

> Let's then use 200 as a ballpark estimate of the number of
> items in a cache digest and start from there.
...
> Therefore, with a
> digest of size 200, we would be using an upper bound of around 18 kB

Hm.. If 200-URL site is the primary target, then a 1:1 bitmap (200 bits
or 25 bytes) can be used. The origin server can return an HTTP header
indicating the bitmap index of the response so that the client knows
which digest bit to turn on for that cached response.

With just 200 URLs, maintaining a set of unique URL indexes cannot be
very difficult and, with an addition of a "digest version" (4 more
bytes), can be fully automated to accommodate changes in the URL set.

Alex.