IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] WS framing alternative

Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com> Tue, 27 October 2009 21:08 UTC

Return-Path: <gregw@webtide.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 2FFE428C131 for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:08:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.287
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.287 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.312, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 CkfzKr6wMS0i for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:08:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-bw0-f223.google.com (mail-bw0-f223.google.com [209.85.218.223]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 412D93A68C3 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:08:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by bwz23 with SMTP id 23so179410bwz.29 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:08:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.204.26.206 with SMTP id f14mr2734295bkc.95.1256677696051; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:08:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?10.10.1.9? (60-242-119-126.tpgi.com.au [60.242.119.126]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 13sm125577bwz.10.2009.10.27.14.08.13 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:08:14 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4AE76137.8000603@webtide.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 08:08:07 +1100
From: Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "hybi@ietf.org" <hybi@ietf.org>
References: <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F0F1EA72C@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com> <Pine.LNX.4.62.0910270903080.9145@hixie.dreamhostps.com> <a9699fd20910270426u4aa508cepf557b362025ae5db@mail.gmail.com> <Pine.LNX.4.62.0910271824200.25616@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0910271824200.25616@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [hybi] WS framing alternative
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: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 21:08:06 -0000

Ian Hickson wrote:

> Not particularly. In languages with automatic dynamic strings (like Perl, 
> Python, ObjectPascal, etc) you just concatenate and all the complexity is 
> hidden from you by the compiler or language runtime. 

Hidden complexity is still complexity.

On enterprise level servers, limiting the amount of data copying
and buffer allocation/resizing is key to achieving scalability.
Managing when and how data moves from kernel space to user-space
is also important and knowing a length up front can help with
that.

Having a protocol optimized for ease of perl implementation, but that
is difficult to optimize for scale is not ideal.

Besides - you say that there are quality utf-8 libraries available. So I
don't see the argument that says it is hard to know the length that is
being sent?

regards

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email