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

Re: Striving for Compromise (Consensus?)

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 19:30:32 +1000
Cc: Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <3C59308D-0A75-4D1F-B7D0-37BE5E9E8620@mnot.net>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>

On 11 Jul 2014, at 7:26 pm, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote:

> Maybe I missed something, but the underlying issues that led to the proposal
> to remove CONTINUATION were complexity, processing cost and sensitivity to
> DoS.  So while the HOL blocking and buffering are probably not impacted by
> the presence or not of CONTINUATION, these other issues definitely are. Or
> am I off-topic ?

There are lots of pathological ways to increase processing cost ó e.g., 1-byte DATA frames. Weíre not talking about limiting those (and I will be EXTREMELY unsympathetic to anyone who brings it up after this).

Complexity has many facets, as weíve heard; itís not a clean-cut decision. 

AIUI the DoS scenario had more to do with HOL blocking and cost of teardown; if thereís a DoS vector thatís specific to this scenario, letís hear it.

Thanks,

--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Friday, 11 July 2014 09:31:00 UTC

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