Re: SYN_REPLY
Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com> Wed, 27 February 2013 18:47 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 DEF7B21F89A6 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:47:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.439
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.439 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.159, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 F8swzh164Nyv for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:47:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F2C521F89FD for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:47:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UAm0v-00069O-7u for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 18:46:01 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 18:46:01 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UAm0v-00069O-7u@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <grmocg@gmail.com>) id 1UAm0l-00068I-7t for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 18:45:51 +0000
Received: from mail-oa0-f46.google.com ([209.85.219.46]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <grmocg@gmail.com>) id 1UAm0k-0002ti-Dm for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 18:45:51 +0000
Received: by mail-oa0-f46.google.com with SMTP id k1so1876818oag.19 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:45:24 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=1OBc8F0OFJNNFcESkaa9e5vlZoRX/C0Fw2XVXxpbzaA=; b=KChSKcXYQGERFqshdqw2Nst1pl/DN6SwlVWpnQTXAr6+NlPrKZMhbnCA7U6oKjZcVI eLlXdujygk2roOfR6/3qm/5VAeQHcRpmHsk28xkXbt12WtAJpbc+ehNQNWxtHp1TzLCX yrZjmLv5Yh+xR1tQCDCaNlTu+7HnvwOY2C2rSXS8XpAJB+XoujFnxqA9c4IuvSmJOlQ4 y+6G+bjFKtTiU3erVW40fZ8EH86iT8aT3uS9IudlyUhFtHNfMaKIRGPlri7djUN60qMU wtlkTLWarPv+uPVGJRq0tfAEX14RjGbsToK/6L2bLr8I9cevqicb/nPFkwKOGs1cqUza 0MRA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.7.3 with SMTP id f3mr3188889oea.64.1361990724123; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:45:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.76.109.72 with HTTP; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:45:23 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnWjYgxbcnEo5SiU_0dN8uSt6SNpjzY0BVvooeHo18T7ng@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABkgnnU5he8x=v+UvV8Oe7mS-3FnMtLmjaz_xk+Ns84LzCpvwQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNdkoFXwWoxGAVGh1Sy6+3EDrzOo-hgP6=9+0PnYaxzXbQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNdYVkjBVRnJAdsHcjHJg_dw3f7T81Br=ioDNcXUG3V0=w@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnUc4C2wTKX9naV9Ver7H9gTnqP84n_8+3QKDRXFyP04jA@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNffguLnO--8SoGo2ceYTJpWut+6PuGN=p4rL84d6TvBrw@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnUcOFY=FtESWyhmayUvFvz===w=_KndNjM_diLkcSOQSw@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNd_3eqoOgOgeXe629dYSaiEosh1m5AOaO_MyKGK=BQmpw@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNcRYa55pe-xAwooZYTPjkcN7h3MgCr1Gy7gWYf6EQSydA@mail.gmail.com> <CAA4WUYj7SJ+QtzANL+hwEfVmO3jZvPgQjTbxs4es0ecnVG3-fg@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNefW3K=H6-Ax9ip4R=VTrTECQ+943BPUBQJ=cV2jo_UMQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAA4WUYiWy1UGUcUVvQMN_W5pTxXEmBSUCFxAaRmzH1U0tBK71A@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnWSqRYAPz3mb1gS3_+O60okZK5NTnzHQC2-NBizsYZgbg@mail.gmail.com> <CAA4WUYh13LOL-NRgeyR3EFf+5p1czs8SEUrMdReOr3=1v8Vb1g@mail.gmail.com> <512D7F92.6030501@treenet.co.nz> <CAA4WUYjmC2Wg3r7CiqSTJXoW6y_CYyRQB4u9dLzkQ4aCWnnL5A@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNfA7+iun5pE_vTqN-ciaJ7kfj_PStdc6HJ1f-yGUR=kUA@mail.gmail.com> <CAA4WUYiaZ6ftTePFiMkJ5y4rBd2eXjnrzk1c24-VYqAEe0ystw@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNdntyXmD71R76kXZFu0E--tv5zT2f5djL4YC6sRq6HdMQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnWjYgxbcnEo5SiU_0dN8uSt6SNpjzY0BVvooeHo18T7ng@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:45:23 -0800
Message-ID: <CAP+FsNfp=wtRVR0dQVe_YcPp0yzQU545THv5byObRdsyOUwPSg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Cc: "William Chan (陈智昌)" <willchan@chromium.org>, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="e89a8fb201644c818804d6b92d03"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.219.46; envelope-from=grmocg@gmail.com; helo=mail-oa0-f46.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-1.731, 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1UAm0k-0002ti-Dm 5d8a02d1c60827bcbef5c877dc29c565
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: SYN_REPLY
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAP+FsNfp=wtRVR0dQVe_YcPp0yzQU545THv5byObRdsyOUwPSg@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/16886
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>
The we're wasting bytes on responses. Bleh. Worse, now we can't simply examine the length field to figure out what to do. Double-eww. In any case, spending a bit in the flags, is far more costly than spending the fractional bit out of the opcode space, which is what is done today! Something I could go with, given the previous change would be to also change the name of SYN_STREAM to HEADERS_WITH_PRIO and leave HEADERS as it is. How does that sound? -=R On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>wrote: > On 26 February 2013 20:16, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com> wrote: > > Taking the priority out of SYN_STREAM would only bloat things on the > wire, > > since the client will always want to state priority for a new stream. I > > don't support removing priority from SYN_STREAM. > > What if HEADERS contained priority? Is your objection to removing > priority from SYN_STREAM, or removing priority from the first frame in > the stream. > > Here's a more concrete proposal, albeit slightly radical. > > Remove SYN_STREAM and SYN_REPLY. > Have stream-level flags that appear in ALL messages. > 1. last frame in stream (the existing FIN bit) > 2. stream priority (a new one) > The 'stream priority' flag indicates that the first 4 bytes of the > frame payload includes a priority. This should (or SHOULD) be set on > the first frame of any stream. > > Then a typical stream looks like: > - a HEADERS frame with the 'stream priority' flag set, plus a priority > - a bunch of data frames > - maybe some other frames >
- SYN_REPLY Martin Thomson
- Re: SYN_REPLY Roberto Peon
- Re: SYN_REPLY Roberto Peon
- Re: SYN_REPLY Martin Thomson
- Re: SYN_REPLY Roberto Peon
- Re: SYN_REPLY Martin Thomson
- Re: SYN_REPLY Roberto Peon
- Re: SYN_REPLY Roberto Peon
- Re: SYN_REPLY Martin Thomson
- Re: SYN_REPLY Amos Jeffries
- Re: SYN_REPLY Roberto Peon
- Re: SYN_REPLY Roberto Peon
- Re: SYN_REPLY Martin Thomson
- Re: SYN_REPLY Roberto Peon
- Constant priotrity (Was: SYN_REPLY) Yoav Nir
- Re: Constant priotrity (Was: SYN_REPLY) Roberto Peon
- Re: SYN_REPLY Patrick McManus
- Re: Constant priotrity (Was: SYN_REPLY) Patrick McManus
- #43: SYN_REPLY Mark Nottingham
- Re: SYN_REPLY William Chan (陈智昌)
- Re: #43: SYN_REPLY William Chan (陈智昌)
- Re: SYN_REPLY Roberto Peon
- Re: SYN_REPLY William Chan (陈智昌)
- Re: #43: SYN_REPLY James M Snell
- Re: SYN_REPLY William Chan (陈智昌)
- Re: SYN_REPLY James M Snell
- Re: SYN_REPLY Martin Thomson
- Re: SYN_REPLY Martin Thomson
- Re: SYN_REPLY James M Snell
- Re: SYN_REPLY Martin Thomson
- Re: SYN_REPLY William Chan (陈智昌)
- Re: SYN_REPLY Amos Jeffries
- Re: SYN_REPLY William Chan (陈智昌)
- Re: SYN_REPLY Roberto Peon
- Re: SYN_REPLY William Chan (陈智昌)
- Re: SYN_REPLY Roberto Peon
- Re: SYN_REPLY Mark Nottingham
- Re: SYN_REPLY James M Snell
- Re: SYN_REPLY William Chan (陈智昌)
- Re: SYN_REPLY Mark Nottingham
- Re: SYN_REPLY Martin Thomson
- Re: SYN_REPLY Roberto Peon
- Re: SYN_REPLY Roberto Peon
- Re: SYN_REPLY Martin Thomson
- Re: SYN_REPLY Roberto Peon
- Re: SYN_REPLY Martin Thomson
- Re: SYN_REPLY Roberto Peon
- Re: SYN_REPLY Martin Thomson
- Re: SYN_REPLY William Chan (陈智昌)
- Re: SYN_REPLY Hasan Khalil
- Re: SYN_REPLY Amos Jeffries
- Re: SYN_REPLY Jeff Pinner
- Re: SYN_REPLY Martin Thomson
- RE: SYN_REPLY RUELLAN Herve