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

Re: Cookie crumbling

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 15:26:35 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnWmaQTfdtBM5BwFYnrqn8FvpNEc-NfKMH_J0NPx7J0kOQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
On 22 October 2013 11:11, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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.

You are describing just one potential solution to the problem.  You'll
note that the issue doesn't make a statement about how the problem is
solved, just that we need to determine whether we need a solution, and
- if so - what that solution looks like.

> 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.

We decided to talk about extensions in Vancouver.  But your -1
presupposes that you need an extension frame (and not a modification
to a header block, for instance.
Received on Tuesday, 22 October 2013 22:27:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:18 UTC