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

Re: HTTP/2 Expression of luke-warm interest: Varnish

From: Yoav Nir <ynir@checkpoint.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 11:58:07 +0300
To: "grahame@healthintersections.com.au" <grahame@healthintersections.com.au>
CC: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <5998FA71-7D06-46D6-8558-A434C301E85B@checkpoint.com>
We may want to add to the requirements the definition of a "minimal implementation", such that supports only one concurrent stream, no server push, and default values for all tweakable parameters. Ideally we could test if such an implementation can be programmed in a day using a basic TCP library (for extra credit use just C and libC)


On Jul 16, 2012, at 9:55 AM, Grahame Grieve wrote:

> +1
> I'm just part of the long tail of http implementers. I don't
> represent any large installed base, I've just written a few
> http servers and clients because it's easy. One of the
> reasons for the success of http/1.x is because you can
> knock out a working server in a day.
> All the proposals here seem very far from that. "Major
> Web Companies lock down the web" seems more apt
> as an inflammatory headline.. but perhaps the easy
> problems have been solved easily, and only the hard
> ones are left, and a two-speed web is the right way to go?
> But it would be a shame to provide no cleaner simple http.
> So +1 for defining the goals.
> Grahame
Received on Monday, 16 July 2012 08:58:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:04 UTC