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

Re: Call for Consensus: Remove "reference set" from HPACK (to address #552)

From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 10:50:39 +0000
To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
cc: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Kazu Yamamoto <kazu@iij.ad.jp>, Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa <tatsuhiro.t@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <31209.1405421439@critter.freebsd.dk>
In message <20140715095234.GD12333@1wt.eu>, Willy Tarreau writes:
>Hi Greg,
>
>On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 02:39:59PM +1000, Greg Wilkins wrote:
>> I just cannot understand why you wish to create an entry in the dynamic
>> table whenever the static table index is used for something like
>> :status:200 ?    I only just accepted the reason that it limited the
>> reference set size to 0 if the header table size was set to 0.  Now there
>> is no reference set, there is no reason for this.

I really don't like that its indicies vary from connection to
connection, (based on the size of the dynamic table used.  That's
going to make debugging and packet-dumping require a lot more state
before you can see any kind of pattern in the data.

Has anybody thought about putting algorithmic compressions in the static table?

If we make 33.Value and 36.Value mean "Integer time_t follows"
(using 4.1.1's integer format), we will probably shave 10 bytes of
each request and response.

-- 
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 Tuesday, 15 July 2014 10:51:06 UTC

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