W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2014

Re: Large Frame Proposal

From: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 13:11:13 +1000
Message-ID: <CAH_y2NEkyvdaz=tKeqNEakmzhUZtAyArxLD9vV-jb45cUxGEdw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 11 July 2014 12:16, Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com> wrote:

> I can't live with 16 bit length.


Just to expand why I cannot live with 16 bit lengths.

I can already see valid use-cases today that exceed 16 bit lengths.   We
have decided that 64KB kerberos tickets are acceptable and necessary to
support, so a kerberos authenticated proxy talking to a kerberos
authenticated server will need two such tickets and that will not fit into
a 16bit header block.

So that use-case will just drive fragmentation of headers (continuations by
another name), which breaks the entire purpose of this proposal.

Either we have frames large enough to carry all acceptable headers - or we
need to go back to basics and come up with a framing layer that does not
treat headers specially.

regards

-- 
Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
http://eclipse.org/jetty HTTP, SPDY, Websocket server and client that scales
http://www.webtide.com  advice and support for jetty and cometd.
Received on Friday, 11 July 2014 03:11:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 30 March 2016 09:57:09 UTC