IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: draft-ietf-quic-http-29, "1.1. Prior versions of HTTP"

Jana Iyengar <jri.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 26 June 2020 01:48 UTC

Return-Path: <jri.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC9823A10DD for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Jun 2020 18:48:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 ocICYeN8x37V for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Jun 2020 18:48:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf1-x131.google.com (mail-lf1-x131.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 184A33A10DA for <quic@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Jun 2020 18:48:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf1-x131.google.com with SMTP id y13so4273040lfe.9 for <quic@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Jun 2020 18:48:49 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=fRGoQcDpydBNzwiZGOpKlbUfQ2b4D69yLHCBZbpPIn4=; b=Dw8t604w8izeZ7K/gI9Bo38g6SnsoSP5ekPf/53yyVKwjDo0JFxGdrRStMlKhRqjVF kcLQMSlXO3zJgwUonnRGnQv/lNJtBhuiDj6/5oQRChnBRqT6ckn9yNnsHW9ECh+iNMES ncEhqUozAJgJz2+Q4E0B4sDWC9UJ2jJULdnJt4P/UwtmP1swZL7wTTlFWfsvvN39olsx mqc+ggD3XoTP9FqVDZsA9riWLwtR/2F51F9axd3LMQLECi2w83xNm16OEeezEK2tyq9s TBridXWvdBtoJnand2WJqIIdGeJiIz73JONLn8JxScPPB59YojRYTua60sHXwomEXCS3 SzkA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=fRGoQcDpydBNzwiZGOpKlbUfQ2b4D69yLHCBZbpPIn4=; b=BfJPXEFs3RrX5ZuaifzU0ye1RzGBcZ+xExyp7X058+L5Q8zTqzt8USrwAaOUVGGNA1 1Ir1KbAmAo5VvkSCpkaQm+n9V60jDHa4QLCw2b+TysPKWP1nt9lInujdN4zIVd8g0NeT CfVZqpDFuFQDaS0MGuFKHCE/LWKtQQ88/jLi1s4Gsdi7E08kbzX9OZmiXULgZJJFao6y Pj2JYx8jUDGjaGloDc8HgVkbLXuWfg56T0H1hra7fURXkmVTN0whkGCxR0VvEuLkAkBc raxgh49XvzpZEqWMwsOwv9pmJph4sVSebken6xZk5agQHVzNXwgV57yqy1ANIk1WyW+p UhWA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530PDFATV8GP0sxRgw3IWOWloU0SfLcuhdqzD2eg3JciLQKJzzbs 0J3dBKUMXJQbToLw0UVM3XlCnq1gtxZeUI2TT0I=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwpklJg4hbmJ2ouJyvjzKitzk3isA4JIV6WBjiY+x6VUnS8IOgkyHnWM9O4M2I67tJ+sgRUsFvBlDi+y1y/lcc=
X-Received: by 2002:ac2:4550:: with SMTP id j16mr456121lfm.37.1593136128238; Thu, 25 Jun 2020 18:48:48 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <8c747b59-1672-4ccb-dfce-0914e74c504f@gmx.de> <9B975808-6BF3-491C-8E32-C475824B0E9A@mnot.net> <7DD3EE98-199B-4F09-A8C8-1CE604989136@gbiv.com>
In-Reply-To: <7DD3EE98-199B-4F09-A8C8-1CE604989136@gbiv.com>
From: Jana Iyengar <jri.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2020 18:48:37 -0700
Message-ID: <CACpbDcdCPMOqrSF_RgFy8NoVdFwNMocU5cOek6knp=Ux5gpN=w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: draft-ietf-quic-http-29, "1.1. Prior versions of HTTP"
To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000000a76905a8f2e958"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/ppZBrLlHSD1bzYKu61bUaM0OS8w>
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Main mailing list of the IETF QUIC working group <quic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 01:48:52 -0000

I've filed https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3790 for this
editorial issue.

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 10:33 AM Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote:

> > On Jun 18, 2020, at 4:19 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> >
> > My .02 -
> >
> > I think we need to balance between being correct and over-complicating
> the text here. In *theory*, Julian is correct; in wide practice, pipelining
> isn't used because of the limitations it has, as well as implementation /
> interop issues.
>
> No, it isn't used by browsers because they aren't aware of the purpose
> for each connection and request. API clients almost always use pipelines.
>
> > How about something like:
> >
> > "Because of limitations in how HTTP exchanges are mapped onto TCP
> connections in HTTP/1.1, multiple parallel connections are often used..."
>
> Why don't you just say
>
>   "Because HTTP/1.x does not include a multiplexing layer, multiple
>    TCP connections are often used to service requests in parallel.
>    However, that has a negative impact on congestion control and network
>    efficiency, since TCP does not share congestion control across multiple
>    connections."
>
> because those are the actual technical limitations.
>
> .....Roy
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email