Re: Alt-Svc across a domain?

Erik Nygren <erik@nygren.org> Fri, 08 April 2016 23:51 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 8991C127058 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 16:51:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.93
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.93 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 lblA7kVYLOJG for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 16:51:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5228212D718 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 16:51:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1aog6V-0001gZ-8c for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 08 Apr 2016 23:46:19 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2016 23:46:19 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1aog6V-0001gZ-8c@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <nygren@gmail.com>) id 1aog6O-0001eu-SV for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 08 Apr 2016 23:46:12 +0000
Received: from mail-ig0-f177.google.com ([209.85.213.177]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <nygren@gmail.com>) id 1aog6N-0007p9-D3 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 08 Apr 2016 23:46:12 +0000
Received: by mail-ig0-f177.google.com with SMTP id g8so29279278igr.0 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 08 Apr 2016 16:45:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc; bh=TCBPrCwU6bCUgLZ7PzpMP8a97oyg4qQ551WtXMr7umk=; b=BKxI9QW7Y9lUYnmKQJF5ltGE4B3/w1rS7Wvsu/+Pp/03BgBU3QPsyJiyuWVxmFUh6X +u6CdJr7Z7AZBg04o9h40JcxK8Z4WtWHIN/7fjn/FoBMxtqPumTme1XEnerc9sddc0xE m6KYp6Sol5lk1VYEPuosPdHSpILVKIm+1JV3ULye6/QOzm9zik6rq1pyrsrjrbKmxr3s 8rk4/X66YLkJZdLWw70UVU7YIK/bhrcpO3voZR258SiqVHrC2wdgtBXAlIk26sTG/psQ Vet+v8QrlpuqH4Nl/rUNvYEnkVb9YFbWt2/8hjLrEQf925OaHchPxcKRoIc77DyArwjS mGDg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=TCBPrCwU6bCUgLZ7PzpMP8a97oyg4qQ551WtXMr7umk=; b=kyLyWbgZjiiaQ7j+AQVwqz4lSyjsjHMAirxF1C10bTSwtTfkIzn7n8Gi/V3JKDT/aO mKKVtgQmTKswB7Qmnu9CDfKBfGi2PbmKExAddGTFZhPT3rW4K7aZjIhKSrV6NeSXVceq Dd4zc16iS5VZR03vHTTSqMf2HmuWycQN8yQjeRzsu6+qXpaHwS3TwR2XdmgHJnZD1TBz 04ocQDSJuAjqU7DLfPTlo2DRKSY7W9cQn22ZyCprZvOvGj/HiT+y6OZmMt6/k9Oc9cZ0 VAIrJW4ld4LiQxGrXgQlDKL12cYLajVIZ3Egy2zMfHd/h2ob5gcfgLJ5LMg2mvWJ+KnZ tCaw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJKgrgC7265LOYdLShCbxsX8N2jqtAGqWjcuD5zGQkbsgN32tvqrw/liFlkZdueMfGrGNQDnVJVED7D1uw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.108.106 with SMTP id hj10mr6351576igb.36.1460159145316; Fri, 08 Apr 2016 16:45:45 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: nygren@gmail.com
Received: by 10.107.200.14 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 16:45:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAOdDvNoLxn4uwL4ZZRJQmjX_0332WQObVdmUti7ifcrUd=jscQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJ_4DfS3qxB+pePU_0sD3XD_7jc8MntRZ9f2mH8eabH30WzyqA@mail.gmail.com> <CAOdDvNoLxn4uwL4ZZRJQmjX_0332WQObVdmUti7ifcrUd=jscQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2016 20:45:45 -0300
X-Google-Sender-Auth: tSrMsU91feapbbuCvgknkNJAhxg
Message-ID: <CAKC-DJiO1=AckR9fEt==6OPVaC7V5Kp=un+j8wMTb0XXrHt2Zw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Erik Nygren <erik@nygren.org>
To: Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>
Cc: Ryan Hamilton <rch@google.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e01536be62c2d21053001cb3b"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.213.177; envelope-from=nygren@gmail.com; helo=mail-ig0-f177.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-1.524, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, THIS_AD=1.695, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1aog6N-0007p9-D3 6d4097cac068376d4839ff3be9281754
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Alt-Svc across a domain?
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAKC-DJiO1=AckR9fEt==6OPVaC7V5Kp=un+j8wMTb0XXrHt2Zw@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/31400
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>

I'd agree.  I also think that without a better Domain Boundaries solution
that is much better than what we have today this has the potential to make
a big mess.  In my experience, there seems to be a wide mixture of origins
within the domain which *aren't* served from the same infrastructure.  eg,
it's very common to use a mix of different CDNs or hosting providers for
different origins within a domain.  This is even before you get to things
like "support.example.com" and "investor-relations.example.com" which might
be CNAME'd over to third-party SaaS providers.

       Erik

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Ryan Hamilton <rch@google.com> wrote:
>
>> Howdy,
>>
>> It is common for web sites to serve content from a variety of different
>> origins within the same domain. For example, www.example.com,
>> accounts.example.com, images.example.com. A single page view may require
>> loading resources from several such origins. (Tricks like domain sharing
>> can exacerbate this proliferation of origins.) It would be great if the
>> service had some way to tell the client, "All of my domains can use this
>> alternative service". What would folks thinks of an include-subdomains
>> parameter in the Alt-Svc value? If such a parameter were present in an
>> Alt-Svc advertisement, a client could use this advertisement to apply to
>> any sub-domain of the origin that the client does not already have an
>> alternative for. This would avoid the need to discover the alternatives
>> individually.
>>
>>
> the server can send, unsolicited, on stream 0 an altsvc frame for each
> origin it wants to provide alt-svc info for (the connection needs to be
> authoritative for those origins, of course).
>
> yesterday's discussion of adding certificates to an established connection
> would make that more powerful.
>
> I would encourage h1 servers to update to h2 to get this feature :)
>
> -P
>
>
>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Ryan
>>
>
>