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

Re: Multiple Headers

From: Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2013 11:52:08 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+pLO_hJk2wVEUu3AsK+QFocA3s0Y=2=+-cG5O4HTmg6yV1rog@mail.gmail.com>
To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Another point requiring clarification:

The draft lists tables with pre-defined headers for "requests" and
"responses." I am presuming that the intention was, for example, that a
server would initialize its sending header table with the "response" table
listed in appendix A.2.

My question is, should the server also use this table when compressing the
PUSH_PROMISE header block which contains "request" headers?


On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 8:13 AM, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:

> It is currently unspecified. There are two ways of doing multiple values
> in the current draft that may change a bit once we get into the type
> codecs. Currently you can either null separate the instances in a single
> header value, or you can use separate opcodes for each (treat them as
> separate headers). The latter can be far more efficient in the encoding.
> For now, I'd recommend the separate opcode approach and revisit it when we
> discuss type codecs in more detail.
> On Jun 16, 2013 7:48 AM, "Jeff Pinner" <jpinner@twitter.com> wrote:
>
>> The SPDY spec defined how multiple headers with the same name were to be
>> encoded (as one header with the value-field containing multiple
>> null-separated entries).
>>
>> Is this the expected encoding
>> for draft-ruellan-http-header-compression-00.txt?
>>
>
Received on Sunday, 16 June 2013 18:52:35 UTC

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