Re: HTTP/2 and TCP CWND

Robert Collins <robertc@squid-cache.org> Mon, 01 April 2013 18:55 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 BDD5F11E80E2 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Apr 2013 11:55:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 nD66DhJhyrRb for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Apr 2013 11:55:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFD5411E80E0 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Apr 2013 11:55:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UMjs2-0003s4-RR for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 01 Apr 2013 18:54:18 +0000
Resent-Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2013 18:54:18 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UMjs2-0003s4-RR@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <robertc@robertcollins.net>) id 1UMjs1-0003rP-2R for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 01 Apr 2013 18:54:17 +0000
Received: from mail-ob0-f173.google.com ([209.85.214.173]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <robertc@robertcollins.net>) id 1UMjrw-0002cL-DQ for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Mon, 01 Apr 2013 18:54:16 +0000
Received: by mail-ob0-f173.google.com with SMTP id dn14so2146540obc.18 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Mon, 01 Apr 2013 11:53:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=UoVf3q5GCBEyPCV7o9/ymFY5tshMztsgWoWQOAugB0Q=; b=ivjOThDTZC2WXZk1mya0xu+UBLBlBBvDmtI/6euHXa8tZF1ndBmFg6+U6d+odvJt8w DKZO8tIt2OG3G2zaFJm/0aEBzZqfczENEQ2LsEA7LnerSBvmtRIJDtlfTejVQu0VJOkJ 0rSM8gRhUqPN7cQJra08mFp0ICUNFAPideNc8roBqUkqNE3zF+cNmlYrnANKH0dVk0h0 7LYs/G1Ec+I/3hT7Lzg95gS62nuO8yMTcxBWaDwmsCwlKkymaxVZLuebCqIsb3EUP3Su xKpFBlRXp34/5l+4iM9OaUPA5JllM5mcG2Vweo/vIIlWcSDXX4upbiyx0Q6eHQBE1hEy of4Q==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.93.193 with SMTP id cw1mr4404278obb.93.1364842426047; Mon, 01 Apr 2013 11:53:46 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: robertc@robertcollins.net
Received: by 10.76.22.166 with HTTP; Mon, 1 Apr 2013 11:53:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [122.58.129.196]
In-Reply-To: <CAP+FsNeG4ew88sWs6OL+PQXbqSANE6smRTJuVBzo8ppkLVPYtA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8e7e9a7db6204492afde5d8883570579@BN1PR03MB006.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CAP+FsNeG4ew88sWs6OL+PQXbqSANE6smRTJuVBzo8ppkLVPYtA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2013 07:53:45 +1300
X-Google-Sender-Auth: g7bgDsu2CZeQDA5jWfpUyu_lV2o
Message-ID: <CAJ3HoZ2zHBNpRw7NrVZO5UsdnPuW3ZiSu56ppM5fqhaP+5=uFQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Robert Collins <robertc@squid-cache.org>
To: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
Cc: Jitu Padhye <padhye@microsoft.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, "Brian Raymor (MS OPEN TECH)" <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com>, Rob Trace <Rob.Trace@microsoft.com>, Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@skype.net>, Gabriel Montenegro <Gabriel.Montenegro@microsoft.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmH0e8Gz8E+pGBXccWxbSovUttpEoiQp0tGt1lWaS1TuV5a68R7J9XUAUrLuNb6+dRW8w2H
Received-SPF: none client-ip=209.85.214.173; envelope-from=robertc@robertcollins.net; helo=mail-ob0-f173.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-3.100, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1UMjrw-0002cL-DQ eb55a7a8f8242934c2bbb49c5a0a979d
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: HTTP/2 and TCP CWND
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAJ3HoZ2zHBNpRw7NrVZO5UsdnPuW3ZiSu56ppM5fqhaP+5=uFQ@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/17191
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>

On 2 April 2013 07:31, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com> wrote:
> Which is worse, starting with 1 connection with a cwnd of 32, or starting 6
> connections each with a cwnd of 6?

Is this an Either-Or situation?

-Rob