- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 17:13:55 +1000
- To: Brian Pane <brianp@brianp.net>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 27/04/2011, at 10:43 AM, Brian Pane wrote: > On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 11:56 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > [...] >> A fair amount of time has passed since the first version (or even most >> recent version!) of the draft, and in my conversations with vendors -- >> especially Moz's Patrick McManus -- I've come to realise that the draft >> is probably too conservative. I.e., There's a desire to have pipelining on >> by default, without any opt-in or special mechanisms from the server, >> using heuristics to back off if a problem is encountered. > > Does this also imply the use of heuristics up-front to decide whether a > given request is a suitable candidate for pipelining? E.g., I can imagine > a client implementation doing something like this: "if method is GET and > request-URI doesn't contain a query string and the request was not > issued via JavaScript then assume it's safe to pipeline." If so, I also > anticipate that web app developers will start designing toward the > browsers' heuristics. Well, nothing prohibits a browser from doing that, but the heuristics that I'm seeing are very carefully watching for errors and slowdowns, and adjusting appropriately. I think that using a query-string as an indicator of whether something will block server-side isn't such a great heuristic. YMMV. Cheers, -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 27 April 2011 07:14:27 UTC