A mini-rant, from the application developer's perspective. It's certainly worth considering low-level transport issues when working on these protocols, however: * As an apps guy, I have _no control_ over the stack underneath me. Unix boxes tend to implement TCP very well. WINSOCKs come in all flavors, some better than others. We've even used a package on the Mac that required a patch to select() to report reset connections. * Is HTTP tied to TCP? I tend to think that many of the "problems" that HTTP-NG addresses are actually with TCP, not HTTP itself. We've done work for firms that (horrors!) don't run a TCP network, but they still see that value of HTTP as a backbone IS protocol. So, when I see references to "advertising different window sizes", or "doing a half-duplex shutdown()", I think that it's nice to know that we can optimize implementations for the commonly used (and correctly implemented!) transports, but it's much more important that the HTTP protocol solve problems *at its level of abstraction*, without making unusual demands upon the transport. Not usually such a luddite, -DaveReceived on Friday, 29 December 1995 20:39:38 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 2 February 2023 18:42:57 UTC