Re: Alt-Svc across a domain?
Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Fri, 08 April 2016 17:48 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 A4D4912D13C for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 10:48:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.031
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.031 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_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 Nooqbw-ZAGTq for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 10:48:10 -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 7CFA012D139 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 10:48:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1aoaQw-0005zY-Od for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 08 Apr 2016 17:43:02 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2016 17:43:02 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1aoaQw-0005zY-Od@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 <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1aoaQt-0005yO-B7 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 08 Apr 2016 17:42:59 +0000
Received: from mail-io0-f177.google.com ([209.85.223.177]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1aoaQs-0006Ht-4S for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 08 Apr 2016 17:42:58 +0000
Received: by mail-io0-f177.google.com with SMTP id q128so140172310iof.3 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 08 Apr 2016 10:42:37 -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; bh=UcRxwDWwKY+adTABDHeoysaxqn9rxCvqp2yi3DNzZ6E=; b=rKP6/mjWVf9ZMf8pHqZy3kxJrGFyGNT9zGFKgC57IA4Yk+kX1YHCZPXM/mboI5WYba kplVg4AdkoUjWVLjQbe+0vNm2AUy5hBG2IuY9cRDVusGV8Pgsj2YqoS0LMeQk/BoVdiR lQBizCiXgoXApIslklJwQAMQZHIIeqa3V4AA5eOCXk/aQoKc7Y5pkvoinpIM5zHRIm9r e+q8neOEEWftMET8ls1vEHpwmV17MTQeNyCK5E2DYQsd7us9Xb5OAaAu1kSkN7q/w5rn k8laByGheq2P/qcZyIghqCuPETbMlbZdQmuppDtUlsASYHdTFHodb+eIzrRJxhZsQAd9 5rkA==
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:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=UcRxwDWwKY+adTABDHeoysaxqn9rxCvqp2yi3DNzZ6E=; b=bPzzcfzS+If+u0VjlbBfGWcX0Nyiv/oaF5+/HL8IIKefAKC1Lf1nmK71Ednq4huvXg GpF7FMVAO3SWjPIrhYyxTPF3RwMzU01WeC1lmASxpsOK8qzleUDIEBqMunmL+chkf18D BF17fiveHJBlb2z4tBJzZzIdQaQlUHiZ25UQkUxLWAlwBTfUyjipUvpWlrQxsMTi+8WX mOe/dOAYWzRR5LNR+gwdR4LLCquf9mblTtd4+zgqzvxi/M7hqqOW1ODJmNZTnZKBxdz2 iBxu65UJizwYdIHjE3ZOZ6eGLg1tuzqqxr2BlkNTmrgHtqg2BOtHSFTgNBxxcU6FOz7x lX1Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJJ0wwGCSY9bWIKoTRD1C0QGsIhINGT4er5/j12lxlqSk5pq6X2p8NUsc8Pg75kt2N/22gumFGg1dUmaJA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.161.140 with SMTP id k134mr11385820ioe.190.1460137352383; Fri, 08 Apr 2016 10:42:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.36.43.5 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 10:42:32 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAJ_4DfS3qxB+pePU_0sD3XD_7jc8MntRZ9f2mH8eabH30WzyqA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJ_4DfS3qxB+pePU_0sD3XD_7jc8MntRZ9f2mH8eabH30WzyqA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2016 14:42:32 -0300
Message-ID: <CABkgnnW+V8Ts=FApsxpS2rxfjjYwVMpTCxQWGLYjtnHRk_JYXg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: Ryan Hamilton <rch@google.com>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.223.177; envelope-from=martin.thomson@gmail.com; helo=mail-io0-f177.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.0
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=0.985, 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, THIS_AD=1.695, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1aoaQs-0006Ht-4S b15d8c1068d8bc8cbe3c7f7cc50772cb
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Alt-Svc across a domain?
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CABkgnnW+V8Ts=FApsxpS2rxfjjYwVMpTCxQWGLYjtnHRk_JYXg@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/31397
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 8 April 2016 at 14:31, Ryan Hamilton <rch@google.com> wrote: > It is common for web sites to serve content from a variety of different > origins within the same domain. For example, www.example.com, > accounts.example.com, images.example.com. A single page view may require > loading resources from several such origins. (Tricks like domain sharing can > exacerbate this proliferation of origins.) It would be great if the service > had some way to tell the client, "All of my domains can use this alternative > service". What would folks thinks of an include-subdomains parameter in the > Alt-Svc value? If such a parameter were present in an Alt-Svc advertisement, > a client could use this advertisement to apply to any sub-domain of the > origin that the client does not already have an alternative for. This would > avoid the need to discover the alternatives individually. That shouldn't be necessary. A server that has coalesced multiple origins onto the same connection can move as many of those as it wants by pushing for each of the origins of interest. [50] [50] I'm going to start recommending that people should push OPTIONS * [51] [51] NOT!
- Alt-Svc across a domain? Ryan Hamilton
- Re: Alt-Svc across a domain? Martin Thomson
- Re: Alt-Svc across a domain? Patrick McManus
- Re: Alt-Svc across a domain? Erik Nygren
- Re: Alt-Svc across a domain? Ryan Hamilton