Re: Please review HTTP performance aspects of Incremental Font Transfer

Patrick Meenan <patmeenan@gmail.com> Wed, 24 July 2024 17:04 UTC

Received: by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) id BCBE9C15109A; Wed, 24 Jul 2024 10:04:15 -0700 (PDT)
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 BC178C151099 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Jul 2024 10:04:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.86
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.86 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=w3.org header.b="Z28R9xFz"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=w3.org header.b="Xmr8/4pa"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.b="IxTUFUL6"
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 464u-mYgXkSa for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Jul 2024 10:04:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mab.w3.org (mab.w3.org [IPv6:2600:1f18:7d7a:2700:d091:4b25:8566:8113]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E60FAC151089 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Jul 2024 10:04:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=w3.org; s=s1; h=Subject:Content-Type:Cc:To:Message-ID:Date:From:In-Reply-To: References:MIME-Version:Reply-To; bh=4u+j6A6HxejLZlgs3wAuVskpcO97Egh9EF+qt9UxwPs=; b=Z28R9xFz892RgKjG6t+dhV3N28 20UBLy3IjnIf926t44dmmwawMBOSqT717/Ituls0dwDaCt4rSy+ayPzi7a/eaANLz46BXHcQO2Yam dC9SDJE+WbnYBHy8zKC5U1MQ+NQS2DA7oetOMpJRyCFXyWrccA+Pj7Qp4io6NZq8zJbXB2PIBmC57 e6CrzYrZ51YoKfZ/396/t579ym7sX3xpC/H3JVNFbUW7Z3by5gzxH+LipdlQVBpjfrDZXWHUWTcF5 zGfUwEomwgNwWank5myGKiZ6rCXhoGqfTAboN/ZmAok2SXMcWm2c5JoUpPe2jcP4c/5GTA7H12hND KDA42F+w==;
Received: from lists by mab.w3.org with local (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1sWfOY-004vgX-1S for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 24 Jul 2024 17:03:18 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2024 17:03:18 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1sWfOY-004vgX-1S@mab.w3.org>
Received: from ip-10-0-0-224.ec2.internal ([10.0.0.224] helo=puck.w3.org) by mab.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from <patmeenan@gmail.com>) id 1sWfOV-004vHT-1W for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.internal; Wed, 24 Jul 2024 17:03:15 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=w3.org; s=s1; h=Content-Type:Cc:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:From:In-Reply-To: References:MIME-Version:Reply-To; bh=4u+j6A6HxejLZlgs3wAuVskpcO97Egh9EF+qt9UxwPs=; t=1721840595; x=1722704595; b=Xmr8/4patx1kcmPOE40dcM0kgIXowa08iJhQ7/0IjgYdtdOUE3f5Y2+DnLMLFeTUZWLVL0CkIGe 7JJEfiCPsnarnIHCqMGEndmufZrRFaY6DtSX4kk0gV4GfhJglbpHgg6NSx577gzoAloUFoimULOne 6MiUrvLM6PzvdyDxgXa8gLCzDh/a8IIehF1+EMjfVC0NJLA4hYtQFlXd6n30xPCSIxY9jQsUHnZmX ZsqPyh9zziwXweu/bYwquiKo1VYIOjNY5bvNvnU4XoZDuTSQgcs7O/qKgqChNrxSFTfr+ktCfbErJ aWtQp2ct3iXivYH2fO8s+DKzEBJnnF+RHSzw==;
Received-SPF: pass (puck.w3.org: domain of gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:4864:20::62b as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::62b; envelope-from=patmeenan@gmail.com; helo=mail-ej1-x62b.google.com;
Received: from mail-ej1-x62b.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::62b]) by puck.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from <patmeenan@gmail.com>) id 1sWfOU-0048ZB-2I; Wed, 24 Jul 2024 17:03:15 +0000
Received: by mail-ej1-x62b.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-a7aac70e30dso6537466b.1; Wed, 24 Jul 2024 10:03:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1721840590; x=1722445390; darn=w3.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=4u+j6A6HxejLZlgs3wAuVskpcO97Egh9EF+qt9UxwPs=; b=IxTUFUL6s+f+h4jgCNARKXPdQx8gyyZZc7dfblVOdaSgUMFgnrHiPPsIke4Cvgk2d8 eTdaYFIoeEZI56TnS25Qh7t7cLS3xu9QXHyrTR4LE1xMqorqgoOcbnGYK15xHfV7HTgs 2sTQ1gWu1y6mToVOa7/4zs30u1tGOvS9YETEoFYjosLeToWuG+JXZ//3s11227r7H7fF 2ucHPtjCUjyRb73Jiz6AG3/mOZJw/xwXc0Lif7SelS9Q1Xoq4+QzEJGI18MLg6OJTdLJ GF+EY+DVHDqdKjQTuHJit0uKoownh5/4zolQ06BD4gi7zCny2UPPpdJaFkNzPSaR6YFo ELkg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1721840590; x=1722445390; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=4u+j6A6HxejLZlgs3wAuVskpcO97Egh9EF+qt9UxwPs=; b=s9Fod7LuOT77q+C9RZZCFcpCRKqaKxzGiv3SUWAtxLcEdBV/xZx0izJ7Lti43Jd0lE ceVa/XuveuJbGRsZcWDUq9Z8VAMJdvTluQ1cZ/r24iAXYTeMy4rF7etxs0vo4eTa7sDj CT9K5YEFnBQs2JSD+iYEb1MXMg9nEifvPtfmJakAebKbmFWm5HgIbIZNgmeQPC0VQR2o NDICBNHnpmMEe6jNIG4RscALAnoQv2WU6JAG3rdlBoy02h9RbclfDnuIQioWw8ovDWlK XJ9HsV5euvOngdHTNzCIdlKIS/tvxnRvRhMTTrO5rN2pGY8grfNBIPye2uRH8Njiz1D+ wxjg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyD/3nm7sUjtOm586yYeTyek0WmIYc/pIJnTR/uPbxwt1nL+fMo QIcWlddRXbC1A+yi0qheSAHIHi9LL8TuRvhSIdRWNDW3En41TlHhPvRpu+QpE5wh+tg+O3L1I9y 0utlDM3iB1WpK90IjrsmH4Gt/8M8dew==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEXpspqefik8gQkWNPZFd/FEue3vEQqFuYo5juVOJ19jQbCgLvWxFScqx4urT3118daVs54bH9YODPRXr8kAe0=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:35c7:b0:a70:c02f:8a7e with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-a7ac52534cdmr2474166b.54.1721840589549; Wed, 24 Jul 2024 10:03:09 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <132cd8d5-d1d0-4912-97c3-9144e814725f@w3.org>
In-Reply-To: <132cd8d5-d1d0-4912-97c3-9144e814725f@w3.org>
From: Patrick Meenan <patmeenan@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2024 13:02:58 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJV+MGxinyW8-PMNKSSSh49nYOvOoJuSHJZU5tYFKRS9BC9-4g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b337c2061e0140a5"
X-W3C-Hub-DKIM-Status: validation passed: (address=patmeenan@gmail.com domain=gmail.com), signature is good
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.1
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, DMARC_PASS=-0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IM=-5, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: puck.w3.org 1sWfOU-0048ZB-2I b38d01ef1b96e90b68fb0a234c89ec8f
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Please review HTTP performance aspects of Incremental Font Transfer
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/CAJV+MGxinyW8-PMNKSSSh49nYOvOoJuSHJZU5tYFKRS9BC9-4g@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/52115
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: <https://www.w3.org/email/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Thanks. From the looks of it, the actual fetching of the incremental font
files and patches don't do anything special with HTTP itself (and it looks
like there was work done to minimize round trips by processing and
generating a de-duped list of patches). Moving to stand-alone patch files
on larg(ish) boundaries will help with the edge caching of the files. It's
great to see the evolution from some of the earlier drafts.

I filed an issue but the one part that looked like it might be able to use
some more fleshing out is the local behavior of patched font files and how
they interact with the on-device caches (caching of patched files vs
re-processing all of the patches every time).

Thanks,

-Pat

On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 9:36 AM Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org> wrote:

> The Web Fonts WG requests review of the Incremental Font Transfer (IFT)
> specification by the IETF HTTP WG. A new Working Draft of IFT was published
> on 9 July 2024 [1]
>
> This specification defines a way to incrementally transfer fonts from
> server to client. Incremental transfer allows clients to load only the
> portions of the font they actually need which speeds up font loads and
> reduces data transfer needed to load the fonts. A font can be loaded over
> multiple requests where each request incrementally adds additional data.
>
> Earlier work [2] demonstrated the performance improvements in terms of
> bytes transferred and reduced network delay, for various network types.
>
> The current draft (unlike earlier drafts) does not require a dynamic web
> server to compute patches. Instead, a table of URLs to the pre-computed
> patches is contained within the subsetted font itself. This means that
> patches are applicable to multiple users, and are cacheable.
>
> Also (unlike earlier drafts, which used a custom patch request protocol)
> the patches are requested with a regular HTTP GET.
>
> We have an Explainer [3].
>
> We would particularly value the review of the IETF HTTP WG on the
> networking aspects, although review of the entire specification would of
> course be most welcome.
>
> Comments should be raised as individual issues on our GitHub [4].
>
> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/2024/WD-IFT-20240709/
> [2] https://www.w3.org/TR/PFE-evaluation/
> [3] https://github.com/w3c/IFT/blob/main/IFT-Explainer.md
> [4] https://github.com/w3c/IFT
>
>
> --
> Chris Lilley
> @svgeesus
> Technical Director @ W3C
> W3C Strategy Team, Core Web Design
> W3C Architecture & Technology Team, Core Web & Media
>
>