IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: So how critical is header compression?

Dmitri Tikhonov <dtikhonov@litespeedtech.com> Wed, 24 January 2018 14:23 UTC

Return-Path: <dtikhonov@litespeedtech.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 427961243F6 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 06:23:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=litespeedtech-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 Ea74DMJHuH1a for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 06:23:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt0-x234.google.com (mail-qt0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::234]) (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 690F512422F for <quic@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 06:23:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt0-x234.google.com with SMTP id z11so10672459qtm.3 for <quic@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 06:23:15 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=litespeedtech-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=SkKkgsLltAsBqCkcqWb/F+HqYRpzeSEu0JCTgpvr8xQ=; b=BaiQ2tOtGycpvQzbbwwFtmoZ/AebfqDUiioK/uF2ydlUqExpb2Lh34/C8o0rJDgOMb qorrhUCJsJpGxyQpd/8b/vrPq1P+CqQaHyAnqMEZj5Avr6F7UjsDh8nqxcBE7oCEn1ct K57VBTFAswIFbk8gB2ORqzhoz8YeQRjZr1czVMkpAS7rxC8LmXiqOsQnxCSoZcISq5BX HH5D+Qf9nzk+NYvY6CAow2eSczXogpUVqfNpv1N1G1Tk3T+4C0vWHNBrBERCo25SSNJm gcN32XmhQeDAp0D00utWt3giqLBm4KoWVpDz7c8Sfkpl82rjiziAkvYb31DvI2GpNhhp dnTA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:content-disposition :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=SkKkgsLltAsBqCkcqWb/F+HqYRpzeSEu0JCTgpvr8xQ=; b=i1jvkXs+w/ZArF383l4LJ2G1/WYOa3sKCYl7FiJOpesZ/NYUagfDWRHI0ZfnGnlXRi UtLL9xcA4SRehcsqw1obYMJiz9+3BaWbHywF9TW5fchN6lm02tvCmfzAzKVviXbRxf6j 9nMcLhnDhdi7ZVnO9mtUgQu731OnvZsDwfMwsAoSYiH+de1LToZ0EdHq8XCCqtw9PIEd zANg5Ag8uLyQwsGiWvFup0HRDy8Hnw7BAYwAFmCLIV5AUMhe5MU3SRBlgzvpWEnVvtID Gy8DWXG4UpOORstHmvacqbgiC/azB+7DmUIrOiI+N7Ys6Ni0qFVbWGvRainl5OEZYaFL sOlA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxytc4C/iFN9QYRdv+LYIMBqZJqcS5U8prbBESj6kjJ/XkdDSLqGqD IEwQhKDUnA91yLkvjz0c34yNKA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x224GTNVWvfI5Md8DOce2oEhjbXhV5mUkHG5tBZDLw39QWQL9MSE4mol360RF9ZOwLku99f/Txg==
X-Received: by 10.200.34.194 with SMTP id g2mr9588999qta.302.1516803794564; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 06:23:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ubuntu-dmitri (ool-2f1636b6.static.optonline.net. [47.22.54.182]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b75sm317879qkb.73.2018.01.24.06.23.13 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 24 Jan 2018 06:23:14 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 09:23:09 -0500
From: Dmitri Tikhonov <dtikhonov@litespeedtech.com>
To: Mike Bishop <mbishop@evequefou.be>
Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, IETF QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: So how critical is header compression?
Message-ID: <20180124142308.GA7729@ubuntu-dmitri>
Mail-Followup-To: Mike Bishop <mbishop@evequefou.be>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, IETF QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
References: <CAKKJt-fhJsRYj+mQ9AYVSTSdKx9nagHEPm5Wtgh9TyOKbS9c=A@mail.gmail.com> <CAKKJt-fDV9L5_WFHozSgD0Fr1qBV=JncpRGV76nAoKY=YDaJ_g@mail.gmail.com> <CAKKJt-eFeHa5A9G2t+D=0rEt4aQEhMkHUzBcHHNsU8XpgoAfaQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAKKJt-es=m1T-Lx4uj4qPYUVzLr=ZngwX73vV3sQ2UWMkEhjUw@mail.gmail.com> <CAKKJt-dwJwyeEJets8nNjE7qAFunnSK4k76r=t_L_en2-erL=A@mail.gmail.com> <CAKKJt-f_8HXeiOKSAH17mHs8_gvSBZcMsK+4FdBkKrYtXmx_=g@mail.gmail.com> <CAKKJt-fRkht=fsNRUUYPg_rLoS6BE6fWc5vO7wisZegy7ggq9w@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnU2BwqxLgEFfEkj0r6s5TTTgExU6fJUm4absvDVWR=QOA@mail.gmail.com> <20180123063052.GA25014@ubuntu-dmitri> <CY4PR08MB2423FB38EC0E9D46C40F4EE5DAE30@CY4PR08MB2423.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CY4PR08MB2423FB38EC0E9D46C40F4EE5DAE30@CY4PR08MB2423.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/whCLKhq5sTLgzas-K2t5JlTQ1gc>
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 14:23:17 -0000

On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 11:14:50AM +0000, Mike Bishop wrote:
> I thought the last one was pretty clearly answered as well:

I do not believe this question was explicitly stated in this form nor
considered by itself.  The notes do not capture any discussion regarding
this issue.

> The transport doesn't trust that the application will read.  If HTTP
> fails to read in certain cases, that's exactly what flow control is for.

I am talking about the effect, not the cause.  The implication of this
in combination with moving table updates to a single control stream is
that the current header compression proposal, QCRAM-04, is just a
variant of HPACK/GQUIC with the same set of problems.

I will expand on this in a reply to the recent QCRAM email thread.

  - Dmitri.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email