Re: Multi-GET, extreme compression?

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Tue, 19 February 2013 04:26 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 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0C3921E8047 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 20:26:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.716
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.716 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.261, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id u2zSHlXxzTzq for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 20:26:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 936AA21E804B for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 20:26:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1U7el8-00053B-BM for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 04:24:50 +0000
Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 04:24:50 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1U7el8-00053B-BM@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <nico@cryptonector.com>) id 1U7ekx-0004sO-49 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 04:24:39 +0000
Received: from caiajhbdccac.dreamhost.com ([208.97.132.202] helo=homiemail-a72.g.dreamhost.com) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <nico@cryptonector.com>) id 1U7ekw-0004sv-6o for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 04:24:39 +0000
Received: from homiemail-a72.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a72.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6E896B0082 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 20:24:16 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type; s=cryptonector.com; bh=HEk2D707GZfUFCwSohWv MWvw2wY=; b=Kzxp0WC+ZRc7HCGuuCW81Idlfs8AADHOXfDG0uH6S0OMlabyD7G6 dS6j7wS69xPU+rwqF0oPv6uphjxZ6F5CnrEM1j1rBrlf+LiiIoTD6VhhcLi4v34G vgOYGE39rIB8p65XiNoB17yzMFIwi4yIB6jrJPwaArsXLWc7FYy68XI=
Received: from mail-wi0-f181.google.com (mail-wi0-f181.google.com [209.85.212.181]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a72.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 695116B007C for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 20:24:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wi0-f181.google.com with SMTP id hm6so4322194wib.8 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 20:24:15 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.108.229 with SMTP id hn5mr20732159wib.28.1361247855186; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 20:24:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.216.254.217 with HTTP; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 20:24:14 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CALcoZioKMpjyKSjjmSfnnxHauG-k33m24cqVHP5LKEsSZzt0ag@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMm+LwiF6EM8_aQgUm=nPS5XqaG25iRGNke_rnHTM1vTGMXdfg@mail.gmail.com> <CALcoZioKMpjyKSjjmSfnnxHauG-k33m24cqVHP5LKEsSZzt0ag@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 22:24:14 -0600
Message-ID: <CAK3OfOhExEv53m535CxKJsdsSuXCazYxyUgTNxnwiz+r+njfCw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Cc: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Received-SPF: none client-ip=208.97.132.202; envelope-from=nico@cryptonector.com; helo=homiemail-a72.g.dreamhost.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-3.449, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1U7ekw-0004sv-6o de38817223bb0494d5aca2eae36708e1
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Multi-GET, extreme compression?
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAK3OfOhExEv53m535CxKJsdsSuXCazYxyUgTNxnwiz+r+njfCw@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/16672
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 Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com> wrote:
>> HTTP 1.1 has a request/response pattern. This covers 90% of needs but means
>> that if the protocol is followed correctly forces a round trip delay on each
>> content request.
>
> It doesn't force it; you can pipeline the requests.

In the context of web pages, the first GET is for the HTML of the
page, and only after the browser begins (or even completes) parsing of
that do the subsequent GETs get issued.

That's a round trip just to get started.

Why couldn't a browser do a GET of the page and also say "also send me
all the stylesheets, scripts, and images you have that this resources
refers to"??  Seems utterly reasonable to me.

All we need is a way to classify which related resources to fetch
immediately without further requests and which not to.  For web pages
the classification is probably something like: stylesheets, scripts,
images, audio, and audio/video -- add resource size thresholds too, or
perhaps a way of saying "send me any of these types of resources that
you think I'll need".  We may need a way to express profiles instead
(text-based browser, sight-impaired user, hearing-impaired user,
scripts disabled, ...).  These MGET profiles might be very
HTML-specific, but we might be able to generalize them enough too.

Nico
--