Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 -------- In message <CAP+FsNfGocr9S992SQNWfW+K9Rz5f1XZcVkC7AoV5WXmxF+Pcw@mail.gmail.com>, Roberto Peon writes: >Dropping the host header will inflate the size of bytes on the wire, to the >detriment of latency. Really ? I thought we hadn't decided how things would be encoded yet, so how can you tell ? As far as I can see, if we did this to HTTP/1 with no other changes we would; Add "http://" ${fqdn} Remove "Host: " ${fqdn} CR NL Which looks like a one byte saving to me ? >I haven't yet heard of a real performance advantage for dropping it. Is >there one? High-performance implementations would not have to text-process the entire header to find the fqdn they use for routing decisions. -- 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 Wednesday, 30 January 2013 22:55:39 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 30 January 2013 22:55:41 GMT