W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2013

Re: Questions on Frame Size

From: Shigeki Ohtsu <ohtsu@iij.ad.jp>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 11:40:06 +0900
Message-ID: <51C3BD06.6020501@iij.ad.jp>
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
It seems that everyone agreed max 16K in HTTP but is not sure for use of 64K now.

I think it is a bad idea to require for all implementers to suport 64K frame size because
it is too early to discuss future extensions for non-HTTP protocols.

I've just made two commits for

1. change the requirement of min size of frame to 8K as previous one (maybe 16K is okay)
2. write max frame size of 16K explicity when carrying HTTP


If this is accepted, I will submit the PR.


(2013/06/21 10:14), David Morris wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Jun 2013, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>> Which implies that server-push is a different protocol to HTTP already.
> Different from 1.1, but a new feature of 2.0
>> IIRC: the 64K limit is for next-generation requirements of systems running
>> HTTP at TB speeds. Allowing new frames to be added for those larger line rates
>> is very useful given they are already on the horizon and HTTP/2.0 has long
>> lifetime ahead.
> In the SF Interim, we agreed to 64K/16K (frame/vs HTTP) to allow for the
> larger frame required to establish a TLS connection without added round
> trips because the initial TLS setup exceeded a single frame.
Received on Friday, 21 June 2013 02:40:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:11 UTC