- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 21:42:03 +0000
- To: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
- cc: Jason Greene <jason.greene@redhat.com>, "Jason T. Greene" <jgreene@redhat.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
In message <CAP+FsNfLP4+wiFWRLFHQszWW8RoYy_vCH+XTrAK9SjafhnHx+w@mail.gmail.com> , Roberto Peon writes: >That isn't what phk@ is arguing, however. He is arguing that HTTP/1.1 is >more 'green'. Roberto, go back and read what I wrote, will you ? I have absolutely no idea which protocol is more "green" at this point in time. HTTP/1.1 is not without its touble in this respect. For instance the combination of Chunked and PDP-11 friendly POSIX APIs are very expensive, so a sensible framing format in HTTP/2.0 can save a LOT of system-calls over HTTP/1.1. -- 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 Sunday, 1 June 2014 21:42:27 UTC