Re: [hybi] Payload only compression extension, again

Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com> Wed, 09 March 2011 12:17 UTC

Return-Path: <tyoshino@google.com>
X-Original-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B06B93A69A4 for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Mar 2011 04:17:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.547
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.547 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.429, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FiFEDMsMJRvz for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Mar 2011 04:17:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (smtp-out.google.com [74.125.121.67]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70F383A696D for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Mar 2011 04:17:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hpaq13.eem.corp.google.com (hpaq13.eem.corp.google.com [172.25.149.13]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id p29CIIZj017680 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Mar 2011 04:18:19 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1299673099; bh=8yKiUFccgc5sxkqZxk8xtFeMKJY=; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=VQAvFP6BCOrgcZNk/WOihZ4B/GK8MUivO+xF8S000iLTzzl+OjxbHPrHcIoHBsgz3 22/b623m/sGsnmTupDRyQ==
Received: from iwl42 (iwl42.prod.google.com [10.241.67.234]) by hpaq13.eem.corp.google.com with ESMTP id p29CIGeb029463 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Mar 2011 04:18:17 -0800
Received: by iwl42 with SMTP id 42so718864iwl.17 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 04:18:16 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=/VieEkxehgJa1hAtbc10S5HEorF+3ayIeFm+caqDv2I=; b=EMhPpivy1D6FwWshtIH0mUSKzGdm+TOt5RaQs2A9cRKGzRpnUIRAP+smzHQ5g1bU60 AdRah12Y7PMinn4lmh5w==
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=google.com; s=beta; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; b=Jmeij0rCLIf26G+my7hsAbOEh/P/Oi3AWJugtjR8+iBQtyq8qBMi0Od6PdVNZTqRvd T5w6xWoropamNGPxMJuA==
Received: by 10.43.58.197 with SMTP id wl5mr6729663icb.304.1299673096356; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 04:18:16 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.231.14.141 with HTTP; Wed, 9 Mar 2011 04:17:56 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik+uh98b0n7U=xrE0Aaa7MyBfZVXSwj+8wfVTKW@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTik2LqCC2-ZLLdWNNaQ18ypcQU_5djJobkYtYk6T@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTik+uh98b0n7U=xrE0Aaa7MyBfZVXSwj+8wfVTKW@mail.gmail.com>
From: Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 21:17:56 +0900
Message-ID: <AANLkTinCtDepu+wDt4=8GyXqhfn=SQ7v2SjJhKzP2Mzr@mail.gmail.com>
To: Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="bcaec517aa643b82e2049e0bb945"
X-System-Of-Record: true
Cc: hybi@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [hybi] Payload only compression extension, again
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi>
List-Post: <mailto:hybi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 12:17:04 -0000

Thanks for feedback.

On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 16:01, Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com> wrote:

> On 1 March 2011 01:51, Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > Seeing several people preferring payload only compression, I'd like to
> > resume discussion on it.
>
> +1
>
> > Requirements
> > - Each message must be able to be uncompressed immediately
>
> +1
>
> > - Want not to mess up dictionary by compressing incompressible messages
>
> Is that to say that you don't want to compress fragments?
> I'm cautious about this as we don't want to have to buffer up all
> fragments before we can decompress.
>
>
Sorry, could you elaborate your question?

I put this in the requirement since IIRC some people said that they want not
to get some incompressible contents (mixed with compressible contents in a
single connection) through the compressor. Like this.

| WS header | BTYPE=01 <compressible contents> | WS header | BTYPE=00
<incompressible contents> | ...


>  > - Want to maintain the compression state (LZ77 sliding window and
> Huffman
> > table)
>
> +1, although it might be good to have this as an extension option that
> can be turned off.
>

I'm fine with that.


>
> > - Want to keep separate dictionaries for messages with different
> > characteristics
> > -- Case 1: Binary and text mixed
> > -- Case 2: Short and long mixed
> > -- Case 3: Application data in data frame and control frame may have
> > different characteristics
>
> -1 too complex.
>

I think that eventually MUX will be available that will keep different
> types of messages in different channels.
> Until that time, I expect to see very little mixed usage on WS
> connections as each usage will just open up a fresh connection.
>
>
Good


>
>
> > --- Apply DEFLATE only to data frame (Is it worth including control
> frame?)
>
> +1
>
> control frames should be in the clear, so that they can be considered
> and handled without the need to track extension or extension state.
>
>
> cheers
>