IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Questions on Frame Size

James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Fri, 21 June 2013 02:56 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 3F1CF21E80DF for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 19:56:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.708
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.708 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.776, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, SARE_HTML_USL_OBFU=1.666]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 70ruA33FnxG9 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 19:56:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D10CC21E80F5 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 19:56:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UprVr-0007GR-IN for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 02:55:47 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 02:55:47 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UprVr-0007GR-IN@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <jasnell@gmail.com>) id 1UprVe-0007Fe-GW for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 02:55:34 +0000
Received: from mail-ob0-f172.google.com ([209.85.214.172]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <jasnell@gmail.com>) id 1UprVd-0001Qi-OR for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 02:55:34 +0000
Received: by mail-ob0-f172.google.com with SMTP id wo10so8031032obc.3 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 19:55:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=nRWYLEpwGf/yiTqZoYO3hrZCUpLLrxklwdkdQPAn2xU=; b=F2cWc7waK3saxGm7cihC0PXqCibDJGeYv1n4Uqdw1Ga7hXbFdCyORho318xV/FYHg2 a3BtL8dBAOb4QPVk6TVyOgsEea58H91JzGw8ALas8KE+QMHroy27dUrThNI+BlxkBx4R gZKRm+gJiLZAPqqHSqSPYL3VfRahQYB5MSKvPD0elsV+HHKFOVeQvSMOImaTFfQ8ERT/ X1p95K+QHRLpDtIxy4KUSPqaoYCvBvpn9O+CmzJ8eTF3tPXcLbVXOCY9THxhiu9HItHE INRrcfYq0uuzood+3WGp2M4Zmdxc1hdHuflkQgSD+Jt7UVcQd4dxLv+TAxboCvYmnrfK Qq+w==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.94.72 with SMTP id da8mr5639310oeb.123.1371783307806; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 19:55:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.60.55.8 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 19:55:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.60.55.8 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 19:55:07 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <51C3BD06.6020501@iij.ad.jp>
References: <51C293FD.1040806@iij.ad.jp> <CABP7RbeS7zeVnOM7R0mcUe+t-M+Ta3GVZr+1A3gSjY8QqCOgzQ@mail.gmail.com> <51C3823E.7010706@iij.ad.jp> <51C3A2A4.6030601@treenet.co.nz> <alpine.LRH.2.01.1306201809370.21683@egate.xpasc.com> <51C3BD06.6020501@iij.ad.jp>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 19:55:07 -0700
Message-ID: <CABP7RbdHwpxm2MUnWGoD3M6SN6p7m6maeJEQRRay9YL_J64FBw@mail.gmail.com>
From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
To: Shigeki Ohtsu <ohtsu@iij.ad.jp>
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e01227c0ec54ffe04dfa130b0"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.214.172; envelope-from=jasnell@gmail.com; helo=mail-ob0-f172.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.696, 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: lisa.w3.org 1UprVd-0001Qi-OR 34e36dfa2242d213f475de2488dbdd81
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Questions on Frame Size
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CABP7RbdHwpxm2MUnWGoD3M6SN6p7m6maeJEQRRay9YL_J64FBw@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/18333
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>

-1... At the face to face we hashed this out.  For the time being,  for the
current implementation draft, 16/64 is good enough.
On Jun 20, 2013 7:43 PM, "Shigeki Ohtsu" <ohtsu@iij.ad.jp> wrote:

> It seems that everyone agreed max 16K in HTTP but is not sure for use of
> 64K now.
>
> I think it is a bad idea to require for all implementers to suport 64K
> frame size because
> it is too early to discuss future extensions for non-HTTP protocols.
>
> I've just made two commits for
>
> 1. change the requirement of min size of frame to 8K as previous one
> (maybe 16K is okay)
> 2. write max frame size of 16K explicity when carrying HTTP
>
> https://github.com/shigeki/**http2-spec/compare/shigeki_**20130621<https://github.com/shigeki/http2-spec/compare/shigeki_20130621>
>
> If this is accepted, I will submit the PR.
>
> Regards,
>
> (2013/06/21 10:14), David Morris wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 21 Jun 2013, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>>
>>  Which implies that server-push is a different protocol to HTTP already.
>>>
>>
>> Different from 1.1, but a new feature of 2.0
>>
>>
>>  IIRC: the 64K limit is for next-generation requirements of systems
>>> running
>>> HTTP at TB speeds. Allowing new frames to be added for those larger line
>>> rates
>>> is very useful given they are already on the horizon and HTTP/2.0 has
>>> long
>>> lifetime ahead.
>>>
>>
>> In the SF Interim, we agreed to 64K/16K (frame/vs HTTP) to allow for the
>> larger frame required to establish a TLS connection without added round
>> trips because the initial TLS setup exceeded a single frame.
>>
>>
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email