- From: Dave Kristol <dmk@allegra.att.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Feb 96 17:44:23 EST
- To: frystyk@w3.org
- Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@w3.org> wrote: > Ted Hardie writes: > > > I have already seen complaints about Netscape's current behavior on > > several lists, including statements which implied webmasters might > > turn off persistent connections in the face of what they saw as > > "piggish" behavior. If there is a valid reason for holding open the > > multiple connections, we should probably make it public as soon as > > practicable, or we may find that false beliefs about its interaction > > with multiple connections will slow the spread of persistent connections. > > As it stands now the perceived time to render will in many cases go up if > using a single persistent connection as it takes longer before the required > metainformation for laying out the page has been transferred. By opening many > connections you will in most cases get the needed metainformation in the very > first packets of each connection and to the user this looks like that this > transfer "mode" is more efficient. > [...] IMO, the offensive behavior isn't that multiple connections are opened, but that they all send Connection: keepalive, and the client never closes them. So eventually the server has to time them out and close them. Netscape's browser could mitigate the damage by either - not sending Connection: keepalive if it knows there are no follow-up requests coming, or - closing any open connections when it knows it's done I understand with Henryk's remarks about perceived performance, but IMO my suggestions wouldn't alter that. Dave Kristol
Received on Wednesday, 14 February 1996 14:51:41 UTC