Re: [hybi] permessage-bzip2, -lz4 and -snappy

Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com> Thu, 13 June 2013 15:47 UTC

Return-Path: <tyoshino@google.com>
X-Original-To: hybi@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C79621F96D9 for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Jun 2013 08:47:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
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 fRGRxP5aVyH1 for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Jun 2013 08:47:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-we0-x22c.google.com (mail-we0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0F9621F98AD for <hybi@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Jun 2013 08:47:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-we0-f172.google.com with SMTP id q56so8127745wes.17 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Jun 2013 08:47:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=nnMpffG+pLD7GT4Lshn0RuZgskUaHGB+VVxyst88J5Q=; b=GlLQkWZmi7rH8AJsEH8+Xj5ZVfbfCJHEIV351+aObMj3hDjO1icWDbXDIRKRUA8/Or OAvhaWdimniFDbYe90BpPUpIqBxITSQV0IPU85V/vdfHGGbhtTh/Kj2OW7vMvjzCjKax Q0+J2lMti5OB1UkuiqPODrUmwxk69SX5QaOOJm3YjK+jF4pZAfmBf87lmPZq8TZmQMYr KuxZ5U9h8H8hLCcba4vg14tszOdmwivdvNQft63fxOW2POAQihbNrWDZJ1vBcQJTCAqH 52DklL2nZ4NBuSBSaf2cNKdS3iOI3zr9TPrcbmVzOTlBLUVpLoB2xYxewwoRmxYxFDoA WGtQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=nnMpffG+pLD7GT4Lshn0RuZgskUaHGB+VVxyst88J5Q=; b=NLkbh5ldb2ZQlGSwSMRbOFR8zVd0DVBCkS5uK1tXY6zSDXrN9+LXJxUgp1z1U8O+C+ XArJbznVujAakpV42EydPS7LyyhP7zL2SyHZ3PoG6UPdk0r6dW+U7FB9vZQlrlao5Gtm OqhGWftPGq4zR0gQUW6VxzuvycazzcG+AcTt//TeLXzqChwpnJv+P076lFNeOhuy5F2C FT4Yh/pSgaUPb2ifCW+7HhhFPtTUzCImUE0eSSocFXlgR2nekbAAz1OkO5iOlYiK2yHD ILwl+k5xv3Ou49hLE3hePZ7QZB0jWgaj3fbcSdw4NI4VaxCK2m4KHCqnEDO/kYHKkdtq DAQg==
X-Received: by 10.194.21.231 with SMTP id y7mr889427wje.94.1371138430083; Thu, 13 Jun 2013 08:47:10 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.194.25.230 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Jun 2013 08:46:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <634914A010D0B943A035D226786325D4422DD31B98@EXVMBX020-12.exch020.serverdata.net>
References: <634914A010D0B943A035D226786325D4422DD31B98@EXVMBX020-12.exch020.serverdata.net>
From: Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 00:46:49 +0900
Message-ID: <CAH9hSJbQoXcP_iK-o3FfSRVdQRXL=md9iU5yAQxGYaffcFJXkg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tobias Oberstein <tobias.oberstein@tavendo.de>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b5d27fc103ccd04df0b0b37
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnEg8tRIM3hbz9ncjMJp/80jgKkcRfhvftXlTp7pfzdiAJrHN0/cmH9R15+BC7Jo9jC3zS7iKOFt30EDoimuRW3ILlhy1k/eOZENBIFigqvxVBX5nRR38DwMej/LA69nKvEU9bkxKxwexyphFhgl6/uXH+4zCYWENt78nu27zvcRuBhMzu6uKjZhTDjBzQZg+yUCStU
Cc: "hybi@ietf.org" <hybi@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [hybi] permessage-bzip2, -lz4 and -snappy
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 15:47:13 -0000

On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 9:50 PM, Tobias Oberstein <
tobias.oberstein@tavendo.de> wrote:

> b)
> - how should the new PMCEs be specified? within Takeshi's current draft or
> outside?
>

As we experienced for permessage-deflate, for each algorithm it should take
long time for investigation on characteristics, performance metrics, and
survey on implementation feasibility. I think they should be specified in a
separate RFC.


> - how to register the extension names and parameters?
>

We don't have any registry to control extension parameters. Each spec
should define their parameters individually, and only register their
extension name to the extension name registry.


> - does above even make sense, given that (as far as I know), none of
> bzip2, lz4 or snappy has an RFC?
>

RFC 2616 doesn't have formal reference to compress. We have RFC for DEFLATE
but it's informative.

We should at least have some normative doc even outside of IETF if
possible. I have no idea about IPR of those algorithms.