- From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 21:05:08 +0100
- To: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 12:04:19PM -0700, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 1/26/12 3:37 AM, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 11:13:28AM +0100, Julian Reschke wrote: > >> On 2012-01-26 10:35, Willy Tarreau wrote: > >>> ... > >>> I find it pretty cumbersome to force everyone to support zlib, especially > >>> in environments where it provides no benefit (small requests/responses) > >>> and only adds CPU usage and latency. It's especially true on intermediary > >>> components which would have to decompress everything to be able to perform > >>> trivial actions such as decide what server to forward to. Using either pure > >>> binary header names or short forms would already be quite efficient. > >>> ... > >> > >> What's a binary header name? > > > > Oh I'm realizing I wrote that ! I was meaning the use of enums instead of > > headers for the common ones. For instance, we could have bytes 0x80 to 0xFF > > directly mapped to most common headers and be able to represent 128 different > > headers with a single byte, and have the other chars for the other ones. > > Sounds a bit like CoAP: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-core-coap/ Indeed, we could see similarities. However CoAP appears to be mainly aimed at embedded system where a byte is counted as 8 bits, and where it makes sense to trade scalability for compactness. Regards, Willy
Received on Friday, 27 January 2012 20:07:42 UTC