Re: The use of binary data in any part of HTTP 2.0 is not good

[William Chan (陈智昌) <[e-mail]>]

Indeed. It might be something similar to
https://code.google.com/p/spdyshark/. Or spdycat
(https://github.com/tatsuhiro-t/spdylay).

On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 3:15 PM, David Morris <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 20 Jan 2013, Willy Tarreau wrote:
>
>> Hi Pablo,
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 07:20:25PM -0300, Pablo wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> >    I have readed this document
>> > http://dev.chromium.org/spdy/spdy-protocol/spdy-protocol-draft1 today [1].
>> >
>> > I just wanted to say that I think that the use of any binary data (framing,
>> > header compression, etc.) in any place of the "header" part of HTTP
>> > protocol is not good; so, please only use plaintext for HTTP 2.0 because,
>> > otherwise, that will make very difficult to "see" the headers's protocol :)
>> >
>> > Thats all,
>> > Thanks for reading this few lines, sorry for my basic English, and I hope
>> > that you can re-think all this of using binary data in any part of HTTP X.X
>> > (ej: session layer).
>>
>> As much as I love to read HTTP protocol in network traces or in programs,
>> I must say that we (humans) are very rare HTTP readers. I suspect that only
>> something like 1 request on 1 billion is read by a human. This is not a great
>> enough ratio for keeping an ambiguous, complex, and sometimes even insecure
>> protocol to parse.
>>
>> I too tried as much as I could to see what would be achievable with a text
>> based protocol, but I finally admitted it was a dead end. At the moment the
>> challenges consist in feeding requests as fast as possible over high latency
>> connections and processing them as fast as possible on load balancers and
>> caches in order to maintain a scalable internet. Humans are very incapable
>> devices there.
>
> It won't be rocket science to create a plugin for Wireshark/etherial and
> other network tools which can format the binary data for those cases where
> humans need to do that for debugging.
>