IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: HTTP/2 Header Encoding Status Update

"Adrien W. de Croy" <adrien@qbik.com> Sun, 03 March 2013 09:16 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 6EA2D21F8634 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Mar 2013 01:16:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.302
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.302 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.297, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 3wtt2X2Lt78C for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Mar 2013 01:16:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC51021F85BB for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Mar 2013 01:16:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UC505-0000Bs-6H for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 03 Mar 2013 09:14:33 +0000
Resent-Date: Sun, 03 Mar 2013 09:14:33 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UC505-0000Bs-6H@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <adrien@qbik.com>) id 1UC4zn-0000B8-NM for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 03 Mar 2013 09:14:15 +0000
Received: from smtp.qbik.com ([210.55.214.35]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <adrien@qbik.com>) id 1UC4zm-0007dn-83 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sun, 03 Mar 2013 09:14:15 +0000
Received: From [192.168.0.10] (unverified [192.168.0.10]) by SMTP Server [192.168.0.1] (WinGate SMTP Receiver v7.5.0 (Build 3502)) with SMTP id <0019544223@smtp.qbik.com>; Sun, 03 Mar 2013 22:16:04 +1300
From: "Adrien W. de Croy" <adrien@qbik.com>
To: James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com>, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 03 Mar 2013 09:13:47 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="utf-8"
In-Reply-To: <m3lia57934.fsf@carbon.jhcloos.org>
Message-Id: <em6672ff78-238a-437f-bb20-23b4e632ba05@bombed>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: "Adrien W. de Croy" <adrien@qbik.com>
User-Agent: eM_Client/5.0.17595.0
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=210.55.214.35; envelope-from=adrien@qbik.com; helo=smtp.qbik.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.7
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.186, BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.626, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1UC4zm-0007dn-83 24fc1164261712a36d9ec1c21ecd7203
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: HTTP/2 Header Encoding Status Update
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/em6672ff78-238a-437f-bb20-23b4e632ba05@bombed>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/16956
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>

------ Original Message ------
From: "James Cloos" <cloos@jhcloos.com>
To: "James M Snell" <jasnell@gmail.com>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Sent: 3/03/2013 11:03:18 a.m.
Subject: Re: HTTP/2 Header Encoding Status Update
>>>>>>  "JMS" == James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> writes:
>
>JMS> ​LSB.. I'm currently following the same scheme as protobufs but 
>that's not
>JMS> set in stone.
>
>IP itself is Big Endian. No protocol over it should choose otherwise.

what proportion of hardware processing HTTP is big-endian?


>
>There is too much room for confusion otherwise.

It's not actually that hard to get right.
you use library functions to get the information from TCP and lower 
anyway.

IME you're more likely to get errors when using big-endian data, when 
you omit a htonl / ntohl.

Adrien
>
>If protobufs does so, that is a bug.
>
>-JimC
>--
>James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com> OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email