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

Re: Should Web Services be served by a different HTTP n+1?

From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 17:01:54 -0600
Message-ID: <CAK3OfOgQwj2nuadOUrtgJefHw3zrauXRGz1-nNtbud9RiBuWiA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
Cc: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>, Yoav Nir <ynir@checkpoint.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
I mean, we have spent a great deal of effort over the last couple of
decades to minimize state in general, in TCP TCBs in particular, and
so on.  We've done that for a reason.

Also, there had better be a bound to stateful compression state size,
and therefore, deterministic synchronization or a synchronization
protocol (which would... add latency).

It's not at all obvious to me that stateful compression is a good
idea.  It is clear that only stateful compression can do something
about values that get repeated a lot, like cookies and URL prefixes,
but I'm not sure that's worth the trouble.

Nico
--
Received on Thursday, 24 January 2013 23:02:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 24 January 2013 23:02:19 GMT