Re: WiSH: A General Purpose Message Framing over Byte-Stream Oriented Wire Protocols (HTTP)

Costin Manolache <costin@gmail.com> Fri, 28 October 2016 17:47 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 C8C23129551 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:47:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.951
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.951 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431, 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 W7DJVMdDGg67 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:47:05 -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 3B7EE129637 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:47:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1c0BAL-00075j-Vq for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 17:42:06 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 17:42:05 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1c0BAL-00075j-Vq@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 <costin@gmail.com>) id 1c0BAH-00074m-IQ for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 17:42:01 +0000
Received: from mail-oi0-f46.google.com ([209.85.218.46]) by titan.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <costin@gmail.com>) id 1c0BAA-0007Am-SX for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 17:41:56 +0000
Received: by mail-oi0-f46.google.com with SMTP id y2so134153274oie.0 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:41:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=XqikN6twxHVSEh0a3WhQG+hwqZzvo+/tSnwnuJl/P20=; b=o+yJN5f07cjh2z7KMj2bSnqs0oxeCb2CeOvEYF052GRWSITlHlU0TfFhhp2iFPlLhv ByDuPEoPkui1CxleRL1wTF3fjFCMIDHumfNGxIGwmYy6xhKxTj08rVM2ShvyB0cj/IsV tVt9/Vjh0LiaW94fS4uV7Eut9MWCPgiZggRpSLxK2nYaiPPoPopa3X+QzU3HQVq7wh8N ZG+nqjd8mQSswFzazuA3hXE97j1I7XKSOJPc5sd5k1ykHWfK7LG5bPo9rw4RXfpi1ZSw I5eKt/Z+vq+uW4imttq0DqNpC+NM36J7PvLy5GXGyuCYiTZwJrLO5R15DaS4BeCb4KVo 3kZw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=XqikN6twxHVSEh0a3WhQG+hwqZzvo+/tSnwnuJl/P20=; b=SRNqMxg2C8dx33dU+s3oYfcc/fDKyvvu87fCgbyQeeQeztl1tZEeeFJh+m7YG70/73 sgMBFrGWGjLQZYGlNo47Z1guitWXEwZJdZkfVpATvIsVvMBGDzjDdhDxCIxVkNKcu8I/ g1K7KeHf9yz3cIICxrkQSI7LgspbEXtFkRTdt7hpyyDkJCMHXjfZBshPNqvAxonpsKqF JAOwAfxLoyQniFTK9eSBpDTnHnDbpolVsQoIozsQbSRLwYVcX13SBxvEntOut+TFRyDG MNEFyauKZoqw0OP2/vv9jZ2Me7bg7Eg+5fUG5jWNSVSXNX7wJ3DCItMDaxVH0tagNMpu dARA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvfPdRqhIZWOYMZw+MfJUnv6UB79KoBCS69KcaqFXY8G4WTB2SVBav9adM6OHIaSQMWn9ImJQ5ruEC47Kw==
X-Received: by 10.107.28.136 with SMTP id c130mr11838361ioc.195.1477676488724; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:41:28 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAH9hSJZdBJ02+Z6o=aanZ=5PN=9VwyL1ZcX2jct-6f_FFivLGA@mail.gmail.com> <0f79ddf6-c455-c41a-f269-a1bdcef05b14@ninenines.eu> <CAH9hSJb2R9gv2vNqoyTjbMV4hZTYdpX2PoAoYgWUT1UuigLHRA@mail.gmail.com> <5541be74-afcc-6aef-404e-63acb2f608eb@ninenines.eu> <CAH9hSJarsNFqX1tAL7BZmZQwUrEQs1X3wtrAPuMyz8s-k_7WRg@mail.gmail.com> <43998e7b-9227-7562-b2c6-c08134065e22@ninenines.eu> <CAD3-0rPRPzVvYb6_Z4wDZp73L5Kyb7LmE0P5j4A-2VSRwT7FMw@mail.gmail.com> <CAH9hSJb=mWdHP8xcBis8-jhWgQTfN-cgQXVV3eCyT4U8JYQHZA@mail.gmail.com> <CAP8-FqnLaRvyQgXXkoNQPKcyMhv-O3RN67CMw5L_-1iQ9c6mhw@mail.gmail.com> <CAH9hSJYpsPW4S9n2LaaLTYYKB7wR3Sod2=fny2CZoUR7A0bSJA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAH9hSJYpsPW4S9n2LaaLTYYKB7wR3Sod2=fny2CZoUR7A0bSJA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Costin Manolache <costin@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 17:41:18 +0000
Message-ID: <CAP8-FqkOX1Sq6_=Sgb++QRiDWKEiOxAJ13kzMSr9heu-Ek3QmA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com>
Cc: Wenbo Zhu <wenboz@google.com>, =?UTF-8?B?TG/Dr2MgSG9ndWlu?= <essen@ninenines.eu>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113fdec634166a053ff05e4f
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.218.46; envelope-from=costin@gmail.com; helo=mail-oi0-f46.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=0.350, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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 1c0BAA-0007Am-SX 811581f7bd6eaea5429947957dc6551c
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: WiSH: A General Purpose Message Framing over Byte-Stream Oriented Wire Protocols (HTTP)
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAP8-FqkOX1Sq6_=Sgb++QRiDWKEiOxAJ13kzMSr9heu-Ek3QmA@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/32710
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>

Current overhead is 2 bytes if frame is up to 125 bytes long - which I
think it's not very common,
4 bytes for up to 64k, and 10 bytes for anything larger.
IMHO adding one byte - i.e. making it fixed 5-byte, with first as is, and
next 4 fixed length would
be easiest to parse.

There are obviously too many options to encode and each has benefits - my
only concern was
that the choice of 1, 2, 8 bytes for length may not match common sizes.

( in webpush frames will be <4k ).

Costin



On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:21 AM Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com>
wrote:

> On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 1:25 AM, Costin Manolache <costin@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> I think WiSH could be great as a fallback to the webpush protocol push
> promises, in devices
> that don't fully support http/2, and for webpush delivery receipts.
>
>
> Great to hear that.
>
>
>
> In the context of IoT: since continuation is available, any reason to
> support 64-bit-length frames ?
> Even 32 bit ( 4G ) frames may be unpractical.  I don't know how common
> this int encoding scheme
> is - but using varint or fixed may be easier to handle.
>
>
> It's basically not to introduce any gap with WebSocket's representation
> power for compatibility while also keeping it efficient for small frames.
>
> Re: varint,
> Actually, old WebSocket protocol I-Ds used base 128 varint for encoding
> frame length for binary frames.
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-00
> We can choose this as this is efficient for small messages but considered
> that WebSocket encoding is already common and honored input which led to
> the WebSocket encoding. IIRC there was some feedback from hardware
> developer against to 128 varint, but I cannot find it now.
>
> Re: big frames,
> We're also seeing that very long messages are uncommon from Chromium's UMA
> stats. We might be able to share that.
>
> Re: small over head for small frames,
> For the use cases where WiSH is layered on top of HTTP2 overhead and TLS
> record overhead, this difference might be negligible.
>
> So, ... I'm open to changing the encoding, but want to hear more :)
>
>