Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Static table negotiation (#1343)

[Martin Thomson <[e-mail]>]

The simplest answer - don't - seems best to me.  The HPACK table is poor, and was poor the day it was released, but that doesn't mean it is useless.  The same is likely to apply to QPACK also.  I think that updating the table based on what we know today is a good move, but a fixed table is OK.

If it were easy to do, then I'd be far more likely to be interested, but as you say it's pretty hard.  The best design is probably to preface every HEADERS frame with a table identifier.  That's close to the instruction idea, but recognizes that every HEADERS frame uses the static table and that synchronization is hard.  That leads me to question whether the extra byte on every frame could be regained by having a better table.  (Yes, the instruction could be dropped once you reached a steady state, but that's both hard to manage; besides, compression efficiency during those first round trips matters most.) 

-- 
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/1343#issuecomment-387888124