Return-Path: 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 9D2A3129A7B for ; Thu, 3 Nov 2016 07:51:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.897 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_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=sendgrid.me 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 QTVEQyfM4dej for ; Thu, 3 Nov 2016 07:51:16 -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 EE520129A8D for ; Thu, 3 Nov 2016 07:51:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1c2JHr-00053i-F7 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 03 Nov 2016 14:46:39 +0000 Resent-Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2016 14:46:39 +0000 Resent-Message-Id: Received: from mimas.w3.org ([128.30.52.79]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1c2JHh-0004yQ-W8 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 03 Nov 2016 14:46:30 +0000 Received: from o1.7n.fshared.sendgrid.net ([167.89.55.7]) by mimas.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1c2JHa-0007NO-DH for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 03 Nov 2016 14:46:24 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sendgrid.me; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:subject:to:cc:content-type; s=smtpapi; bh=bZrfqDWyXGYP0DZVIWbtWM3hIgo=; b=sG19c+iuYN7sqWiiSH sbIvQSw4GgPXwSv6EYN262N8NV7gyuaBZAkoRxdV0X58oaFzXYaBB7RMLHIY7Hr9 Nv4IcVLAvDsDbna1ART3alQure7gfYZZKTBOrNEVLt1ARP9gOcKTwkjc2n9VxFby JKq0tMOfxhg39IwvEGycoQm54= Received: by filter0553p1mdw1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter0553p1mdw1-5596-581B4D98-8D 2016-11-03 14:45:44.469236797 +0000 UTC Received: from mail-yw0-f172.google.com (mail-yw0-f172.google.com [209.85.161.172]) by ismtpd0004p1iad1.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id V73d_4I6QI6__c6-T6LzVQ for ; Thu, 03 Nov 2016 14:45:44.432 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yw0-f172.google.com with SMTP id h14so48576248ywa.2 for ; Thu, 03 Nov 2016 07:45:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvdeqalO6QlKrA08v1qu+Po9iQ0EMwwoL+FLmlzU2X96AMKdAdS0W+mIttIgv+hdb7JlMAdnWZi/5VoD8A== X-Received: by 10.107.205.13 with SMTP id d13mr2389333iog.8.1478184343653; Thu, 03 Nov 2016 07:45:43 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.64.228.236 with HTTP; Thu, 3 Nov 2016 07:45:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <147793576451.32369.14134057573457350871.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <3669167D-26AC-4B78-8175-99B0028B6891@cloudflare.com> <06396a0d-a0c1-19fc-85d5-6ddfb9bcf39f@gmx.de> <568945A1-75B6-4E9D-9021-38479FC55580@cloudflare.com> From: Patrick McManus Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 10:45:42 -0400 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: To: Jyrki Alakuijala Cc: Vlad Krasnov , Matthew Kerwin , Martin Thomson , HTTP Working Group Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c187b40b757bc0540669c75 X-SG-EID: YLWet4rakcOTMHWvPPwWbcsiUJbN1FCn0PHYd/Uujh5lF1Hpat+YaUS8NwM/kf4O9fwzxEmJh9g7W0 oVCkPrkO14RCnqQJYPqRf3qG3FgR624uO844b+XNTtbHMrfHjrI1d9PDRjFfILI7zO99OV7155ax9w DEP6+QjzVn9lCizsDc7acnmWJf/otZTgPh5aKW9ooze8KarQdBqbZX2T6Ssboq+O4/fCQA1cxnwH9o 4= Received-SPF: pass client-ip=167.89.55.7; envelope-from=bounces+1568871-208f-ietf-http-wg=w3.org@sendgrid.net; helo=o1.7n.fshared.sendgrid.net X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.5 X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=0.211, 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_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.305, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1c2JHa-0007NO-DH bcd69c9bcaac486cb146f4f23a63c9b8 X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org Subject: Re: New Version Notification for draft-vkrasnov-h2-compression-dictionaries-01.txt Archived-At: Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/32838 X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Post: List-Unsubscribe: --94eb2c187b40b757bc0540669c75 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 6:32 AM, Jyrki Alakuijala wrote: > Yes, this is consistent with our experiments. Brotli + custom dictionary > is more efficient than SDCH + custom dictionary with further gzip or brotli > compression. > > With small (~150 kB) dictionaries brotli wins SDCH by 10-20 % (20 % at > brotli quality 11, 10 % at quality 6), with larger (1 MB) dictionaries > more, 20-30 % (30 % at brotli quality 11, 20 % at quality 6). The larger > the custom dictionary, the more powerful brotli comes in comparison to > SDCH. All our experiments indicate that SDCH is fully redundant and can be > abandoned if we add custom dictionary support to brotli content encoding. > this is a good discussion. We should also be congnizant of the recent movement towards "content-encodings should be self describing" that came out of the encrypted object draft discussion - which sdch doesn't quite match (yet?). Perhaps a brotli with a uri for its custom dictionary combined with push of the dict gets us there (handwave). --94eb2c187b40b757bc0540669c75 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

= On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 6:32 AM, Jyrki Alakuijala <jyrki@google.com><= /span> wrote:
Yes, this is consisten= t with our experiments. Brotli + custom dictionary is more efficient than S= DCH + custom dictionary with further gzip or brotli compression.
=
With small (~150 kB) dictionaries brotli wins SDCH by 10-20 = % (20 % at brotli quality 11, 10 % at quality 6), with larger (1 MB) dictio= naries more, 20-30 % (30 % at brotli quality 11, 20 % at quality 6). The la= rger the custom dictionary, the more powerful brotli comes in comparison to= SDCH. All our experiments indicate that SDCH is fully redundant and can be= abandoned if we add custom dictionary support to brotli content encoding.<= /div>


this is a = good discussion.

We should also be = congnizant of the recent movement towards "content-encodings should be= self describing" that came out of the encrypted object draft discussi= on - which sdch doesn't quite match (yet?). Perhaps a brotli with a uri= for its custom dictionary combined with push of the dict gets us there (ha= ndwave).

--94eb2c187b40b757bc0540669c75--