- From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 11:11:07 -0700
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
FWIW, I experimented with an alternative to the existing set-cookie/cookie mechanism that used an extension frame type with it's own isolated compressed header block and typed codecs and achieved a roughly 40-70% improvement (depending on cookie content) in compression ratio over the current cookie crumbling approach. Personally, I'd much rather -1 the cookie crumbling as a premature optimization and explore alternative approaches later on once we have a better defined extension model. - James On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote: > Turns out that splitting the Cookie header into pieces improves > compression efficiency considerably. It also turns out that we haven't > done that, despite talking about it, testing code with it, etc... > > Just raised an issue to track this: > https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/292 > > I think that we've had agreement to do this in the past, but it's been > suspiciously absent from the compression draft. Roberto hopes to be > able to work this part out for the post-Vancouver/88 version of the > drafts. >
Received on Tuesday, 22 October 2013 18:11:55 UTC