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

Re: Framing and control-frame continuations

From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2013 14:30:57 +0000
To: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
cc: Roland Zink <roland@zinks.de>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <31878.1360161057@critter.freebsd.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
--------
In message <CAP+FsNfTZ56An-g3qa5Xo6+ZH_hBUHFM2shHrn-NmM6VWzS_oQ@mail.gmail.com>
, Roberto Peon writes:

>In any case, if/when we implement and there are real performance
>bottlenecks, we can rev the protocol [...]

Yeah, and 640k is enough for everybody, trust us, we've tested this.

Sorry for getting a bit sarcastic here, but I am frankly flabbergast
here that anybody can even propose a <64kByte framesize for a protocol
which will not emerge from standardization for another five years
and which is supposed to last at least 10 years after that.

Just make it 32 bit length, and move on, ok ?

-- 
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, 6 February 2013 14:31:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 6 February 2013 14:31:20 GMT