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

Re: Issue #155: Capping header compression index values

From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2013 14:26:17 -0700
Message-ID: <CABP7RbcV70fuDKzrckDeUwHP5jj+v0if87dzjNz6ufKnN9TfTQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
I posted the issue to track and document it. Whether or not there is
anything that can or ought to be done is to be determined.

On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1 July 2013 13:58, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:
>> When using Literal Representations with Incremental Indexing as
>> defined by the current Header Compression draft, a long lived
>> connection could potentially end up with rather large table index
>> values...
>
> I don't understand what you are trying to get out of raising this issue.
>
> The table and related mechanisms just exist.  We aren't specifying
> algorithms for using these mechanisms, any more than we say what
> content you put on your blog.  Some techniques will get better results
> than others.
>
> I hope that your request here doesn't imply that you are advocating a
> particular compression algorithm.
Received on Monday, 1 July 2013 21:27:04 UTC

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