Re: FYI: Tools to evaluate header compression algorithms

Roberto Peon <fenix@google.com> Mon, 07 January 2013 19:05 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 899AA21F88D1 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 11:05:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.31
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.31 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, SARE_HTML_USL_OBFU=1.666]
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 f9S6fAMc9F44 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 11:05:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7B6921F88C8 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 11:04:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1TsHyU-0007qf-2z for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 19:03:06 +0000
Resent-Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 19:03:06 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1TsHyU-0007qf-2z@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <fenix@google.com>) id 1TsHyR-0007py-7u for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 19:03:03 +0000
Received: from mail-ia0-f174.google.com ([209.85.210.174]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <fenix@google.com>) id 1TsHyQ-0000HC-6M for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 19:03:03 +0000
Received: by mail-ia0-f174.google.com with SMTP id y25so16476174iay.5 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 11:02:36 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=M66B3WQ6rKO3nGppNSUecBiWmH5HcYmCokMF0BGWs3I=; b=POjLunz+W47l7tMKHJqjLhKVfWAqCvs/aBTcDHRSfs9PfyB42+WNsFt7EvvmBafu9X Li4exlRNqk5It2rmpXzrxrPkBoFktbTlwyXC04cIxLKUbgM8VQDxOO2yUsid4bpxVlpg NWx6HWfJT+wUYHYye1eiuhAfFm3KTgvLFhHDowir5BCHX0/WfgPmF7UK4qn58FIzrAe8 h3Uyq8QiwNVpCe21DY9NeJXe4ozs4YHyH1ox1SFTBFDfMrudV256D6X9FJFOmN/0uqKA JZKgMPakubDE3kjGgZeN7zwN/Ce0bQHMACrPB51/kHcLCdVAkjpEn84wusB+tKHiqCNT swyQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=M66B3WQ6rKO3nGppNSUecBiWmH5HcYmCokMF0BGWs3I=; b=OE57J2LLT1wGsN46Zsfos9tHGTHXtMAFfqSZj7JZ8rJK7TJV6wmtG5QytG9P1Pa5pE 4IOy/DDDlhWz0SUrV39yFTz5ghNM/uHLXHAp9fbosGmDDKE9iSCs0mwivKnBbi2h1aJu Iklizegtg5z0hH+YUlM592UVTFYvaY7j+s/mpIQG+kxtl26wez1+a6maJ/67jbLR0aM9 nxNEwONYkPhQd0txtskxD/pQnRfCmQKEFNVNYfniJVOPoujpTA2cbG5fM/buSXq481ix Q+rqmzrDq0JbeipaedRgwMuAShtEHHAU+KzSfZnB7cLo+c+Pj8grLnSpzve4MjKAz/1E sq8g==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.50.214.2 with SMTP id nw2mr6524217igc.110.1357585356130; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 11:02:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.50.1.99 with HTTP; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 11:02:36 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAKRe7JF3hca6suaN=Jbzd5tiH-wyzY_eS1pwurKHh_mWZb+4Kw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <B7943590-9C82-4B5B-B084-89347B9B7D6A@mnot.net> <A7C46E35-DFC2-4E7B-A41A-5074ACEBA31C@mnot.net> <50E93B9B.1080506@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <CAP+FsNeKot9cuZprj3aeZ3HF_H8-E40OT98x-Vh7F6HoRFr_RA@mail.gmail.com> <CAKRe7JF3hca6suaN=Jbzd5tiH-wyzY_eS1pwurKHh_mWZb+4Kw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 11:02:36 -0800
Message-ID: <CAGzyod4cuRYE_uT7BM6+xRZ7N0TQ5E_eyOGAXvrZTW5tqnBsgg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Roberto Peon <fenix@google.com>
To: Ilya Grigorik <ilya@igvita.com>
Cc: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="14dae93404f3e78b6604d2b778a3"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkA9Qs/VdEUcejdFTDioxTPBwK7UFO6ktnM6QqycGT2CQBuV2Lq7OESLaQM8VBX5XQ8QKTKgXkAoWkEh6Ua4t2YoPsr/wnuNu/A7Yrj2SUDg5uDSFgIttYO3Ez5KxX6EFGYuv6jOwcrOt1r2g/oZZ0oNKGJJqR3tyetqZwShOb9/eDrERTZDwExA1u4nyXHOCmHtsST
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.210.174; envelope-from=fenix@google.com; helo=mail-ia0-f174.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1TsHyQ-0000HC-6M 5408e23bd6b9640ea6f2ff5608c3c555
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: FYI: Tools to evaluate header compression algorithms
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAGzyod4cuRYE_uT7BM6+xRZ7N0TQ5E_eyOGAXvrZTW5tqnBsgg@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/15801
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>

As Mark already points out, this is pretty different as it only includes
the first page. Given how the compressors in general work, this is likely
to bias the results towards compressors that do better on only that page
load to the detriment of those which do better on further page loads.

We need traces of the "average user interaction" for each site to do a
really good job.

-=R


On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Ilya Grigorik <ilya@igvita.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 1:55 AM, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Do you have some suggestions Martin?
>> The obvious thing in my mind is to get submissions from site owners, but
>> that takes interest on their part first. :/
>>
>
> HTTP Archive is now scanning ~300K top domains (at least according to
> Alexa). While its still "top site" biased, I think that's a pretty good
> sample to work with. I believe we should be able to get the HAR files from
> it.
>
> ig
>
>
>
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 12:53 AM, "Martin J. Dürst" <
>> duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2013/01/06 14:57, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>>>
>>>> Quick follow-up:
>>>>
>>>> I posted more about this here:
>>>>    http://www.mnot.net/blog/2013/**01/04/http2_header_compression<http://www.mnot.net/blog/2013/01/04/http2_header_compression>
>>>>
>>>> In particular, we have graphs for all of the HAR samples I took earlier:
>>>>    http://http2.github.com/http_**samples/mnot/<http://http2.github.com/http_samples/mnot/>
>>>>
>>>
>>> These look very interesting. Just two points for the moment:
>>>
>>> - Drawing connected curves seems misleading, because we are not
>>> mesuring/showing a continuous quantity that varies over time, but discrete
>>> requests and responses.
>>>
>>> - The data sample includes big guys only. Some criticism of speedy has
>>> said that it is geared towards the big guys. Is there a way to get some
>>> more of an impression of how headers look at the long tail of websites?
>>>
>>> Regards,   Martin.
>>>
>>>
>>
>