Re: Redirection to Other IP Addresses

Bin Ni <nibin@quantil.com> Thu, 01 August 2019 03:55 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 5EC5112013B for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 20:55:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.698
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.698 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.201, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=quantil-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 L_98Km0c3fRM for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 20:54:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [IPv6:2603:400a:ffff:804:801e:34:0:38]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E4FAF120136 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 20:54:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1ht28R-00047b-E8 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 01 Aug 2019 03:52:11 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2019 03:52:11 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1ht28R-00047b-E8@frink.w3.org>
Received: from titan.w3.org ([2603:400a:ffff:804:801e:34:0:4c]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <nibin@quantil.com>) id 1ht28K-00046l-K8 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 01 Aug 2019 03:52:04 +0000
Received: from mail-vs1-xe29.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::e29]) by titan.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <nibin@quantil.com>) id 1ht28H-0004Q0-QI for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 01 Aug 2019 03:52:04 +0000
Received: by mail-vs1-xe29.google.com with SMTP id j26so47908714vsn.10 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 20:51:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=quantil-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=1TGZ5FFdPPc3DVBBtpd/SlWG1a7ZdlGLl9fDZqeC4Vs=; b=pWiKRyfXypm6JhV5IqGVZH4MilVBG5Z0jfrnTtMSRRJ3LsBeqNL4ccu6vaYGby0IxV ogaPedDKvSgOlqugFGxNTO5KfCEieVvprAFbNDiDSlJqBcCGUPuaxsCW5AWvoOSkji0O Rlkx0p3800GYKOk9PinUQDL/2oO9bu1bXvy8BChjpEThaQv73XbLiKuSy21U1Wk8JXkW cii6++nyo0G/JVWHgiYGw3k0/pjsR3mHatAOD7wQSJ771+o0bkRrn5R2/ioT1UfoBkFK g1jz0GdTcxXYbG6PooaZVQkfw4G3VEG27ZBOHnvUMpx8hFbK7fiW81m8sxc8U8iDRoN2 19Zg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=1TGZ5FFdPPc3DVBBtpd/SlWG1a7ZdlGLl9fDZqeC4Vs=; b=DX1c5zSleF6JesjQIh3MGjkyPfDfzeGphpzyiixZi8539+UjNJKFW6+mKUzBogoXaD WTvm7NbbYY3H3ra+mkEbinROpEEdBpDBN82f+Wmnoag6ilD9+pwdC1r/vh7x8+EuWiWK Y33tgkLMOyy61qK3Ri9qI0azJrYZswDbxmETxO+O+H8wksx3xbZ6WrS7v0bij5ftQ6hs oal3KV/Pv38mD4PRQ7oq5QLaITwOwqyxGsDqPW1XFqIFLGa4IgmY5U1jM91sjHMTo4I6 1T3ysn0aXMG4s3FJ2Pm4vQ41woxd+7AnmICBrr0BHWbzKNa3WaI9pRRdNaZnyL8cIJYK 1hxw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVm07Egh78f4R5BHSYmVDBLaxI+bRI5LLKorANyL7A5xBg80Pg/ WeUHvH/0cARKnOtA5uUGKwM79pkFdpsg7Dwudr+TiQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwCtGWhZXWTqfEWT8dahxVRfg81b0ggKCEAp/5v9xLdzas4J+h2GvmmDBiLUKlfUD3yIkBG56HPjeNj0vDtaQQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a67:1143:: with SMTP id 64mr38668376vsr.133.1564631499812; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 20:51:39 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAFifEMLOHp5=OqUXZbg_WKNQmNsTW3Bg5P4btJdX06CF=Wi2AA@mail.gmail.com> <d9b03ef6-9c8c-1eb2-7f74-014f9703475d@gmx.de> <CAJ_4DfQifbJJ7owfrgUUOqXimL-KQkb4-1f_Qp6+CMjhYC1bbg@mail.gmail.com> <CAFifEMJPZd9CGghi_MJ1Hrcq7TJNnkV6yH-EKtrrfaQmStS4Ug@mail.gmail.com> <b09ab672-f512-52bc-6c28-7df55919a846@gmx.de> <CAFifEM+TXtsxTt-NcH+hQomEAYZmMTW_kPxXvQB69eM4KgGf7g@mail.gmail.com> <d4d25ceb-09b5-72ff-6c36-7fdfc2796b15@gmx.de> <CAFifEMKff11nmJZgE1RGWT8qH6SKsO2tqWCF9vQsvF5=BMeQgg@mail.gmail.com> <45C10C32-DA87-4AE3-9082-DAAFD5D9C412@vcontractor.co.za> <CAHbrMsAE1ZezM5U_b2s3juc4OC0LJDOpyHfek7Pu2AaQcXpf8A@mail.gmail.com> <CAJU8_nWP63pT08X4QkUmk6KT_U98LjiFvNaTNg5ZtVMG3AFiFg@mail.gmail.com> <CAFifEMLnSB5SYb_q0toTE3Xy1i56=14ki=__91Phc76HHL+ZhQ@mail.gmail.com> <f05b5157-f068-1e03-8422-36d0425a32a5@treenet.co.nz> <CAFifEMLQXUSHKOjKN9JR87ht1UUvf-1AEWKNmuKeOqKyzjT28Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAJEGKNtWvXyrFLU0KW-rqN1qd-PLOqobjx1o6kRcH27_O9Ri7Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAFifEMKhjU=EmMj6yyVN5D1aSfCVi9HAWgE-Ebzu8NscKQpv_w@mail.gmail.com> <CAJEGKNvoKijzJsTOSE0w08wst=zxoTa95Jx8xVfRWmCWJTJ=4g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJEGKNvoKijzJsTOSE0w08wst=zxoTa95Jx8xVfRWmCWJTJ=4g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Bin Ni <nibin@quantil.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 20:51:28 -0700
Message-ID: <CAFifEMLrWwBoPDQZiHvp65zwS+0CEka1sSoLMYQo6ydYit3aNQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Chris Lemmons <alficles@gmail.com>
Cc: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c04868058f06287f"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::e29; envelope-from=nibin@quantil.com; helo=mail-vs1-xe29.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=0.470, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1ht28H-0004Q0-QI 5e52ca535dc284756ea900a1e7db4e87
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Redirection to Other IP Addresses
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/CAFifEMLrWwBoPDQZiHvp65zwS+0CEka1sSoLMYQo6ydYit3aNQ@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/36900
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: <https://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Hi Chris,

There are a few caveats in your reasoning:
1.  It does not have to be some "accept header". It can be the "User-Agent"
header as I mentioned, for example, chrome version > 100. Or on contract.
For example, some CDN customers have full control of the client software.
They just tell the CDN provider that "you can enable the 312 redirection on
all of our domains".
2. Even when it does rely on some "accept header", there is still a
critical difference from "alt-svc":
    In this proposal, the current request will not be served. The client
will get a 312 and forced to reconnect to the new IP, similar to the 30X
redirection.
    Versus with "alt-svc", the server will serve the content for the
current request, client will finish receiving the response and MAYBE
connect to the new IP for the next request.

Hope this is more clear. Please don't hesitate with more questions!
Thanks!

Bin

On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 6:49 PM Chris Lemmons <alficles@gmail.com>; wrote:

> So, the typical mechanism for that would be an accept header of some sort.
> But if clients are opting into the redirect, then the redirect is
> effectively optional. Any client that would set the accept header can
> instead just support alt-svc today and choose to redirect.
>
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 7:39 PM Bin Ni <nibin@quantil.com>; wrote:
>
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>> Great question!
>> The solution is that the server will only return the new status code 312
>> if it is sure the client can support it.
>> The information can be from the User-Agent header, or some other request
>> header.
>> Or communicated through some other channel, for example, on a paper
>> contract.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Bin
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 2:36 PM Chris Lemmons <alficles@gmail.com>; wrote:
>>
>>> So I have to wonder about the end usefulness from an implementation
>>> perspective. Part of why alt-svc works is that it's optional, so
>>> servers can use them as optimization but everything else still works.
>>>
>>> If you have a new protocol that means basically "alt-svc, but
>>> mandatory", it means the CDN, load balancer, or similar service simply
>>> wouldn't work for any client that didn't understand the new value.
>>> There are a _lot_ of http clients out there. This would be a fairly
>>> high barrier to adoption, which would create a chicken-and-egg problem
>>> that would be tough to solve.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 5:53 PM Bin Ni <nibin@quantil.com>; wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Hi Amos and All,
>>> >
>>> > Regarding the 30X redirect across different cache servers, it is
>>> already used by many big CDN companies that I know of.
>>> > It is proven to make the system faster without much burden on the
>>> front-end layer which you are concerned.
>>> > But 30X has the limitations I mentioned. This is why I'm proposing
>>> this new type of redirection to address the limitations.
>>> >
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gtF6Nq3iPe44515BfsU18dAxfCYOvQaekiezK8FEHu0/edit?usp=sharing
>>> > So it is not a question that this proposal will be useful or not.
>>> > I know it will at least be very useful to those CDNs.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks for your comments.
>>> > Please let me know if you have any questions.
>>> >
>>> > Bin
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 12:38 AM Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>;
>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> On 30/07/19 7:02 am, Bin Ni wrote:
>>> >> > Yes, what we want is a way to force a "deterministic behavior from
>>> the
>>> >> > client", just like all the 30X redirections today.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Let me give a few more cases in which this can be helpful:
>>> >> > 1. A client in North America is returned a server IP in Europe by
>>> the
>>> >> > DNS. The server then wants to direct the client to another server in
>>> >> > North America for better performance.
>>> >> > 2. The content of a website is hashed to multiple servers based on
>>> URL.
>>> >> > These multiple servers may not even be in the same datacenter. The
>>> DNS
>>> >> > does not have this information and may return any IP to any query
>>> of the
>>> >> > website's hostname.  Each server will calculate the hash for each
>>> >> > request and redirect client to the correct server that has the
>>> content.
>>> >> > This is quite common for CDN.
>>> >>
>>> >> It is common for good reason: efficiency.
>>> >>
>>> >> There is a secondary level of efficiency that comes from the redirects
>>> >> being actual HTTP 30x redirects. Having large objects at different URL
>>> >> entirely provides for a different CDN or caching layer closer to the
>>> >> client to provide the large object contents. DNS can be (often is)
>>> >> involved in that layer to provide the closest server IP.
>>> >>
>>> >> As proposed so far your mechanism would flatten this two-tier
>>> structure.
>>> >> Forcing the frontend layer (now only layer) to be involved in deciding
>>> >> the specific hardware location of individual objects / resources.
>>> >>  Making the frontend machinery store more information and do more work
>>> >> per-request is not going to make the system faster, quite the
>>> opposite.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> By separating the work into the three layers: frontend LB, cache, and
>>> >> origin. Each CDN layer gets some orders of magnitude increase in
>>> >> performance / capacity:
>>> >>  - origin able to handle/generate some few thousand responses per
>>> second,
>>> >>  - cache able to re-distribute those as static objects at line speed
>>> for
>>> >> an order or two magnitude more than origins,
>>> >>  - frontend LB able to handle millions of the small ~1KB
>>> >> request/response pairs for redirection spreading that high load across
>>> >> the lower layers.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> AYJ
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>