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

Re: Connection limits, was: Straw-man for our next charter

From: Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 13:19:36 -0700
Message-ID: <CABaLYCuUFmt_y9HpSGcenS0zGCp8mof6CYMOD6mq7jh=0KV73g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 12:08 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>wrote:

> On 31.07.2012 06:04, Mike Belshe wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com
>> <mailto:masinter@adobe.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Your post is consistent with the assertion that there isn't
>>     agreement yet about what "faster than HTTP/1.1" means, or how to
>>     compare proposals for improvement. And neither measured worst case
>>     latency or real network traffic with buffer bloat, or situations
>>     that would detect the impact of HOL blocking.
>>
>>
>> While SPDY leaves a tiny HOL issue, it fixes the massive one from
>> HTTP/1.1, which can only load a couple of resources in parallel per
>> domain (2 by spec, 6 by implementation best practices).  The tradeoff
>> turns out to be a boon in terms of reduced latency while also using
>> fewer network resources.
>> ...
>>
>
> "By spec" in RFC 2616, but not in HTTPbis (this has been fixed a LONG time
> ago!).
>

Alright :-)  spec fine, but still a practical issue in all major browser
implementations today.

mike


>
> Best regards, Julian
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 31 July 2012 20:20:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 31 July 2012 20:20:10 GMT