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

Re: h2 header field names

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2014 14:02:18 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnVXp8Tx_pLbZuozfeaQ8J9yznkuyEQAuYRciCOwppbVCg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc: Ilari Liusvaara <ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi>, Martin Nilsson <nilsson@opera.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 5 September 2014 12:37, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:
> I doubt we have the clout to redefine base64

That's not the point.  The point is that if you are using private,
opaque tokens (cookies are one example), and you can choose the
mapping between binary and what gets put in the header field, then the
choice of optimal character set allows for higher efficiency.

I built a tool that does this for you based on arbitrary character
availability and the HPACK table
(https://github.com/martinthomson/bhpack).  The gains over base64 are
marginal enough that it's really worth using in practice.
Received on Friday, 5 September 2014 21:02:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 30 March 2016 09:57:10 UTC