W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: Backwards compatibility

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2012 12:54:22 -0400
Cc: Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com>, William Chan (Dz) <willchan@chromium.org>, "<ietf-http-wg@w3.org>" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <ADA0C953-1FF4-45E6-846C-481E521CAF67@mnot.net>
To: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>

On 31/03/2012, at 12:31 PM, Mark Watson wrote:

> Interesting - I knew this was not a new idea, but did not know about this draft.
> 
> Any idea why it did not catch on back then ? I could imagine at that time pipelining was not widely enough supported to make this interesting.

It'd be interesting to hear from Jeff, but my impression was that layering it into existing implementations was too difficult, and because the risks of it being misinterpreted by a slightly buggy implementation were too great.

In a way, the same reasons have also hurt pipelining adoption.

Cheers,


> 
> ...Mark
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Mar 31, 2012, at 3:06 AM, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Mark,
>> 
>> On 31/03/2012, at 3:03 AM, Mark Watson wrote:
>> 
>>> I was assuming you could avoid the head-of-line blocking with an extension that allows out-of-order responses.
>> 
>> That's been tried in the past; see:
>> http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-mogul-http-ooo-00.txt
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> --
>> Mark Nottingham
>> http://www.mnot.net/
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 

--
Mark Nottingham
http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Monday, 2 April 2012 16:54:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:59 GMT