- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 14:18:47 +0000
- To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
- cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
In message <CAMm+LwhkvtPOVV=hi2TcYQ9F46Pf459m4Pj309VkHg6NOOYqyg@mail.gmail.com> , Phillip Hallam-Baker writes: >What I care about is not how long it takes to >implement but if I can implement on restricted chips like embedded >control systems. So code footprint is more important to me than >time-to-implement. And I think it is a more objectively fair test. I think it is a good point, if we have any hope of getting rid of HTTP/1.0, HTTP/2.0 must penetrate all the way down into access points, home routers and other embedded consumer products. NIST has used similar criteria for AES and SHA3 beauty-contests. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Monday, 16 July 2012 14:19:16 UTC