- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 17:59:14 +0000
- To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- cc: Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
-------- In message <20121128174449.GD7227@1wt.eu>, Willy Tarreau writes: >On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 11:08:42AM -0600, Zhong Yu wrote: >The main problem is that HTTP is not well suited for use with TCP (!). Indeed, this is a major problem in so many ways it's not even funny. However, considering the penetration of HTTP, it's not inconceivable that we could get a couple of much needed extensions to the socket API to stick, possibly as a "TCP considerations for HTTP/2.0" informal RFC. If there is interest in this, I can make FreeBSD one of the reference implementations. One extension I have been pondering for a long time, is a true per-socket idle timeout (Ie: no data-carrying packets in either direction and no outstanding data to transmit for T time) Poul-Henning PS: And just in case some of you missed it, Queue had a couple of very interesting spotlights on the dark buffer bloat issue some time ago: Article: http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=2071893 Interview: http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=2076798 -- 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 Wednesday, 28 November 2012 17:59:37 UTC