Re: New Version Notification for draft-kazuho-early-hints-status-code-00.txt

Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com> Thu, 03 November 2016 02:31 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 E2D54129871 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Nov 2016 19:31:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 2sqQo0gmo9Xf for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Nov 2016 19:31:41 -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 904FD129866 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Nov 2016 19:31:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1c27kN-0000J9-4l for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 03 Nov 2016 02:27:19 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2016 02:27:19 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1c27kN-0000J9-4l@frink.w3.org>
Received: from titan.w3.org ([128.30.52.76]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <kazuhooku@gmail.com>) id 1c27kH-0000IM-MU for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 03 Nov 2016 02:27:13 +0000
Received: from mail-wm0-f52.google.com ([74.125.82.52]) by titan.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <kazuhooku@gmail.com>) id 1c27kB-00066N-Ng for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 03 Nov 2016 02:27:08 +0000
Received: by mail-wm0-f52.google.com with SMTP id t79so72729036wmt.0 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Wed, 02 Nov 2016 19:26:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=QI8hkWhzjGDoLMuIsJoyZiM920kQTx01scwmDjv0wpY=; b=qwy/ENjUd0qB2aimwkZw3jYKskOIKmLEqirv53m7jLLBHu4kA04In3nHBB0+WQGuBQ 8/e/9c39lgH/kFos1fm4Q9od+JUl1ZEWv1n+zUzWF0lsjzFhrR/1ZDNJNz12XHQIqfPQ VOpQotKeXSzQG9EOEhjN4A6MH/jksNtJZXc5VDhX353tDma0Kijrg2Tmy+jODzNgyvRX qPusJeZq2CVlLRh9gQmza4tnbjyrZxATgu/aM8JQ7EuACFS3XELKn72SZGVd/I5nJvBc uzzc0N2ekIN39C5y6a7qhn1lujjISy2bwvH0pEbCK8gHTjiEAjhbFySDUqmsWsFQEO3y Rm3A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=QI8hkWhzjGDoLMuIsJoyZiM920kQTx01scwmDjv0wpY=; b=QY3RovJwVQA39hR1SfB2lpwlgjVOIT2LpfR43pyNV68FaWTuzQERJS3pLP5gbmqcJb ubMNkEEFzz9RrO3ObgSjLV7uLkfjHkzEyy+ieOpHRnP/WsgcI0ns5m5bhcdk6uhlO0jN 6nMYHKubg+uIm8ICDEFF15iVzuncNFYILKB0bK7HuqaJiNoJfihRXjFIgq+sSCMuvFlt Fv1G7TFoZ6/hRh7rG9BzTmAsyak5E/MXb/dytsNkqTb6DhF3gQduynHkbFQ9g27v+7ec NPQKm7X/A4LvHLl7+B+3w+qKhOfrrBfolV6hpEYysZjPJIHtj+czkOWvzHExrpgtpU3X sU1g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvdVc13XfSmPMQr0RRppyndx/4XNVTlmzklkFUPtiSEQIy8ioM0ZIj8qYQI/lcNVOcETV6k0EPI4BYV+7A==
X-Received: by 10.194.172.42 with SMTP id az10mr5287588wjc.145.1478140001180; Wed, 02 Nov 2016 19:26:41 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.194.163.69 with HTTP; Wed, 2 Nov 2016 19:26:40 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20161102214648.130375fd@ginster>
References: <20161102214648.130375fd@ginster>
From: Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 11:26:40 +0900
Message-ID: <CANatvzznarGkPNMv7pRhGL+=FHjpd4WK3wBMkfVNDh_YQ4R33w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Werner Baumann <werner.baumann@onlinehome.de>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=74.125.82.52; envelope-from=kazuhooku@gmail.com; helo=mail-wm0-f52.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.9
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-1.373, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1c27kB-00066N-Ng 8a7764b28b900438df5af43ff5ce38dc
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: New Version Notification for draft-kazuho-early-hints-status-code-00.txt
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CANatvzznarGkPNMv7pRhGL+=FHjpd4WK3wBMkfVNDh_YQ4R33w@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/32827
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>

2016-11-03 5:46 GMT+09:00 Werner Baumann <werner.baumann@onlinehome.de>de>:
> Just wondering.
>
> Cory Benfield wrote:
>> All of this *excludes* the alarming reality of the many millions of
>> embedded HTTP/1.1 stacks which are implementing a protocol that is at
>> best a second cousin to the one specified in RFCs 7230+.
>> ...
>> What that means is that the user-agent field will not be used to flag
>> non-compliant implementations, it will be used to flag *compliant*
>> ones, as there are vastly more of the former than the latter. That
>> means that Chrome, Safari, Firefox, Opera (maybe), curl, and wget
>> will all get a pass, and everyone else will be “guilty until proven
>> innocent”. That means that we are rolling out a feature that is
>> expressly a "browsers-only” feature if we deploy it in this way.
>
> Now reading the rationale of the draft:
>> Most if not all of the web pages processed by a web browser contain
>> links to external resources that need to be fetched prior to
>> rendering the documents.  Therefore, it is beneficial to send such
>> links as early as possible in order to minimize the time spent until
>> the browser becomes possible to render the document.  Link header of
>> type "preload" ([Preload]) can be used to indicate such links within
>> the response headers of an HTTP response.
>
> Isn't this features mainly intended for the WWW and browsers and
> whitelisting these would meet the goal of this draft?

The target of the draft is to optimize web browsing experience, but
the expected recipient of Early Hints is not restricted to the
browsers. Reverse proxies (and possibly forwarding proxies) are
expected to convert links found in 103 into HTTP/2 push (for details
please refer to the latter half of the Introduction section).

In fact, part of the motivation of me drafting this document is to
standardize what some HTTP/2 proxies (e.g. nghttpx, H2O) already do.

> What other use
> cases would want to benefit from this? Embedded HTTP/1.1 stacks?
>
> Werner
>



-- 
Kazuho Oku