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

Re: Review: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-mbelshe-httpbis-spdy-00.txt

From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 16:20:04 -0800
Message-ID: <CABcZeBPmJrZgyL3PrudvxHsZ1NLhmE1t3VBAO0EwU66rWCN9-w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, Henrik Nordström <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>, Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 1/03/2012 12:53 p.m., Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>>
>> In message<1330559425.24673.149.camel@home.hno.se>, Henrik
>> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Nord
>> str=F6m?= writes:
>>>
>>> ons 2012-02-29 klockan 15:16 -0800 skrev Mike Belshe:
>>>
>>>> The problem with upgrade is that it costs a round trip of latency.
>>>
>>> Only if you are pipelining and then only on the second request, and
>>> pipelining on the first request is generally a bad idea anyway. So no.
>>
>> There is of course an incredible evil way to indicate what protocol
>> you want, without expending a RTT:
>>
>> Have the server send a TCP option in the SYN+ACK packet that tells
>> you what it can do on this TCP connection.
>
>
> Heh..  I was just about to suggest a TCP option.
>
> I don't think stack support is that good for such things though.

No doubt this is why SPDY uses a TLS extension (NPN).

-Ekr
Received on Thursday, 1 March 2012 00:21:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:56 GMT