Re: HTTP/2 Push deployed on webtide.com

Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com> Mon, 18 August 2014 23:58 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 (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C50701A0032 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Aug 2014 16:58:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.947
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.947 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, 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 3uwbuOsbmQHj for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Aug 2014 16:58:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 493A01A002C for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Aug 2014 16:58:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1XJWmE-00016B-Pb for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 18 Aug 2014 23:55:50 +0000
Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 23:55:50 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1XJWmE-00016B-Pb@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <gregw@intalio.com>) id 1XJWlw-00015A-PO for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 18 Aug 2014 23:55:32 +0000
Received: from mail-we0-f179.google.com ([74.125.82.179]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <gregw@intalio.com>) id 1XJWlv-0006H6-Et for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Mon, 18 Aug 2014 23:55:32 +0000
Received: by mail-we0-f179.google.com with SMTP id u57so5768088wes.10 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Mon, 18 Aug 2014 16:55:04 -0700 (PDT)
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:content-type; bh=Yz9q2Na1+IFp6bnSN8xCzcsDH5vDcI2tpmqeCtF5c+Q=; b=hkENeHvVCYVkQuVAJWleCSNBz494EkBn8PUvpUioBriz8kq5Qh2PzoOq4UBWnxBUP/ SsrVmvKtARIHSFbwOfdDSwVmvAhIQTO5QuDJqqFjM1a/9TMzekTmOZWY1jfL3n/Eeui0 OdBBl6CwHts6D+v0Gvcc5ehGep456nqFHXw7mbtYliYsJzWWACj364F57S/SU6ZXT1yR m8Geyx9dfOW+OmXvmiH9FVamIjcWVJPDfWJA1VKCz7dBoO+LyZmXm72qXZllj1K6mIna Tpis3BpP+fHVLUneBdTxqe9YVRlJSFMCoyiSVNLGYiOLyq1ooaLHr4qq4fpUjYA+Lkqx RJRA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmpahGpaTTmW3pB+a8HxhlbDhWCNxKATAJA+K1aeaDOhKdQLNqA5/xZh8LHoJrVHLGxvkFm
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.158.226 with SMTP id wx2mr12503965wjb.107.1408406104738; Mon, 18 Aug 2014 16:55:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.169.98 with HTTP; Mon, 18 Aug 2014 16:55:04 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAFWmRJ0gbdoTL7AWxqMa-qJhWB2u_FshxG=qZ2pYEGML2wWWmA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFWmRJ0gbdoTL7AWxqMa-qJhWB2u_FshxG=qZ2pYEGML2wWWmA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 09:55:04 +1000
Message-ID: <CAH_y2NHwVay7ZLSh16V8eB0tmyLQS_fyvdRbUhifHv7XCWdB0w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
To: Simone Bordet <sbordet@intalio.com>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e01184cc692a4fa0500f01928"
Received-SPF: permerror client-ip=74.125.82.179; envelope-from=gregw@intalio.com; helo=mail-we0-f179.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-3.101, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1XJWlv-0006H6-Et 632ec8b82cb54f754df5ac4c643f41be
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: HTTP/2 Push deployed on webtide.com
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAH_y2NHwVay7ZLSh16V8eB0tmyLQS_fyvdRbUhifHv7XCWdB0w@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/26643
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>

Note that there is a thread on the Servlet EG list regarding an API for
push:

https://java.net/projects/servlet-spec/lists/jsr340-experts/archive/2014-08/message/1

where I've been asked some questions to describe "the rationalization used
by the httpbis wg"

Since I can't speak for the WG, I thought I'd echo my thoughts here
regarding the push mechanism to check that I'm not misrepresenting anything:

   - Push is a server-side coordinated mechanism in as much as the server
   must decide to push a resourced based only on information that it already
   has.   Specifically h2 provides no information on the contents or status of
   downstream caches.
   - Servers are free to innovate push strategies, with some of the
   following having been suggested:
      - Use knowledge from the web application/framework to determine what
      are associated resources.
      - Use heuristics derived from referrer headers and timing to infer
      what are associated resources
      - Use sessions to track what resources a client has
      requested/received to avoid unnecessary pushes
      - Use the presence of if-modified headers to infer the status of a
      client cache to avoid unnecessary pushes.
      - There are no functional problems other than increased latency of
   not pushing an associated resource
   - There are no functional problems other than wasted bandwidth of
   pushing an unnecessary resource:
      - Clients can reset a pushed stream if they determine it is
      unnecessary.   Thus is a server attempts to push a resource that
is already
      cached by the client, a RST will prevent wasting too much bandwidth.


Hopefully nothing controversial or misrepresented there?

cheers



On 18 August 2014 18:57, Simone Bordet <sbordet@intalio.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> the Jetty team has deployed h2-14 with HTTP/2 Push functionality on
> https://webtide.com, see
> https://webtide.com/http2-push-with-experimental-servlet-api/.
>
> We are very interested in comments about how to make HTTP/2 Push
> better, so please try it out and tell us (also see discussion bullets
> towards the end of blog post).
>
> Thanks !
>
> --
> Simone Bordet
> ----
> http://cometd.org
> http://webtide.com
> http://intalio.com
> Developer advice, training, services and support
> from the Jetty & CometD experts.
> Intalio, the modern way to build business applications.
>
>


-- 
Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
http://eclipse.org/jetty HTTP, SPDY, Websocket server and client that scales
http://www.webtide.com  advice and support for jetty and cometd.