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

Re: Rechartering HTTPbis

From: Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 09:32:05 -0500
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <1327588325.2052.404.camel@ds9>
On Thu, 2012-01-26 at 14:19 +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

> For instance, starting to put "congestion responsiveness", whatever
> it is, on top of TCP sounds just plain bogus to me.
> 
> It shoulds like an attempt to work around a problem which should
> be solved where it lives (TCP & deep black buffers ?) rather than
> inefficiently band-aided around at a random higher different level.
> (See also: OSI protocols)
> 

all I'm saying is that spdy's propensity to use 1 connection where HTTP
is currently using dozens has significant implications on how congestion
control impacts the transport. Most of those implications are very
good[1]! A few might not be so great[2].

It seems pretty clear to me that the IETF is the right place to have the
discussions about the tradeoffs of how an application protocol interacts
with the network.

-Patrick

[1] probably include reduced bufferbloat, less use of constants like IW
and default RTO, better ability to respond to various fast-recovery loss
signals

[2] due to in-order guarantees of tcp, loss events create fate sharing
of that delay between the multiplexed transactions on a spdy connection
- something you don't see with HTTP/1 parallel tcp connections.
Received on Thursday, 26 January 2012 14:32:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:53 GMT