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

Re: FYI... Binary Optimized Header Encoding for SPDY

From: Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2012 13:24:52 +0900
Message-ID: <501B5294.1090709@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
To: Timothy Knox <tdk@thelbane.com>
CC: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 2012/08/03 4:29, Timothy Knox wrote:
> Somewhere on Shadow Earth, at Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 10:48:52AM -0700, James M Snell wrote:
> <snip>
>> This is precisely why I favor the introduction of a binary value option and
>> the definition of highly-optimized binary encodings for the most commonly
>> used protocol headers (like method, version, etc). Things like Host and
>> Request URI need to be looked at tho. I suspect that, for a variety of
>> reason, we'll want to keep limiting those values to ASCII only.  (just
>> because the value COULD be UTF-8, doesn't mean a specific header definition
>> cannot limit the actual value to some reasonable subset).
>
> For the Host header, I have just three letters to say to you: I-D-N. :-)

You mean Internationalized Domain Names, and specifically U-Labels (the 
thing that can actually be read the way it's intended to read, rather 
than some useless salad of letters after xn--)? I fully agree. The 
reason these are in punycode in HTTP/1.1 is that HTTP/1.1 is way older 
than IDNs, but for HTTP/2.0, that's not the case.

Regards,   Martin.
Received on Friday, 3 August 2012 04:25:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 3 August 2012 04:25:40 GMT