W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2013

Re: Proposal: New Frame Size Text (was: Re: Design Issue: Frame Size Items)

From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 20:27:45 +0000
To: (wrong string) ™ˆ™˜Œ) <willchan@chromium.org>
cc: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Hasan Khalil <hkhalil@google.com>
Message-ID: <57675.1368476865@critter.freebsd.dk>
In message <CAA4WUYijhOjJ1fo7VhUD6ezsOGO9P5q9M=q_p8J3CiDawG3bjg@mail.gmail.com>
, =?UTF-8?B?V2lsbGlhbSBDaGFuICjpmYjmmbrmmIwp?= writes:

>I'd like to see a
>proxy/server implementer (PHK has already voiced some support) champion

Well, sorry to disappoint you, but I'm down to trying to reduce the
damage where and if I can.

The current proposal is about as far away form how I would like to
see HTTP/2.0 look as it can be:  Speculative, Complex, far too many
parameters and not in any way streamlined for high-speed hardware
based routing and processing.

In other words: The archetypical result of engineering by committee
to solve yesterdays problems.

Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Monday, 13 May 2013 20:28:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:13 UTC