Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] DATA frame encoding is inefficient for long dynamically generated bodies (#1885)

Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com> Fri, 19 October 2018 21:52 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@github.com>
X-Original-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD7A8130DF4 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Oct 2018 14:52:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.064
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.064 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.064, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=github.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fH8ODsTMPyvQ for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Oct 2018 14:52:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-2.smtp.github.com (out-2.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 192DA130E10 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Oct 2018 14:52:55 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2018 14:52:54 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1539985974; bh=2S42CD1LNk+RNqc9w2g6WUZswHTGIRwxp10T4VpAyAw=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=T08LK3u2wPU+LbltY2EWpulaCEpmbacOg1QLPOhFkmepZC9V8dsykyILI9dD0Rym9 M9WHpPe//HG8RvjZUsud3mEqVP7IlQPga/7xipqwHpwogqQp4HykJposAAomXvkUZB P0SyRlJ2ToHmbdaQ64dOfYDvaT8uspBCHnv9ym/M=
From: Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4abf852ab1f4a37f28d7286aceb2391efd90b6c763d92cf0000000117e2143692a169ce16286866@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1885/431510458@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1885@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1885@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] DATA frame encoding is inefficient for long dynamically generated bodies (#1885)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5bca5236d524_2a6e3f8dd62d45bc240064"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: kazuho
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/B2sSLXienWqWPNUYwol3ugXg9EI>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <quic-issues.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic-issues/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic-issues@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2018 21:52:57 -0000

@MikeBishop 
> I'm curious to hear from implementers how much of a challenge they foresee this being in their architectures.

In case of H2O/quicly, it is almost nothing to support DATA frames expanding to EOS.

However, it is harder to do the same for other types of frames. The code is based on the assumption that we can cap the maximum size of the frames, and buffer them until they are fully received.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1885#issuecomment-431510458