- From: Jeffrey Mogul <mogul@pa.dec.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 11:46:02 -0700
- To: http-wg@hplb.hpl.hp.com
A few weeks ago, I gave a short "Work In Progress" talk at USITS (the "USENIX Symposium on Internet Technologies and Systems") about some very early research results I had obtained about the potential value of supporting out-of-order responses in HTTP. Several people came up to me after the talk and seemed very eager to try out this kind of mechanism. One person had even implemented the idea in his own server code while the session was in progress. So it seemed like it might be a good idea to propose a standard extension *before* lots of people started to deploy this kind of thing. Hence, I wrote up a simple proposal as an Internet-Draft: Title : Support for out-of-order responses in HTTP Author(s) : J. Mogul Filename : draft-mogul-http-ooo-00.txt Pages : 14 Date : 09-Apr-01 http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mogul-http-ooo-00.txt The introduction of persistent connections and pipelining into HTTP has resulted in potential performance benefits, but has also exposed the problem of head-of-line blocking. A simple, compatible, and optional extension to HTTP to allow a server to issue responses out of order could significantly reduce HOL blocking. In this extension, clients add short ID fields to their requests, and servers echo these IDs back in their responses. This extension is defined as a hop-by-hop rather than end-to-end mechanism, so it avoids much of the complexity of the end-to-end approach. If members of the HTTP-WG mailing list have comments on this, I'd be happy to receive them. I want to stress that the research evaluation that might prove (or disprove) the value of this approach has NOT been finished. So it does not make sense to start an argument about whether this is useful (unless someone else has already done a careful evaluation of this kind of approach). I'm just looking for comments on whether the protocol makes sense (and, in particular, whether it might lead to screwups by caching proxies that don't comply with the HTTP specifications). Thanks -Jeff
Received on Wednesday, 11 April 2001 11:52:02 UTC