- From: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 09:55:32 -0700
- To: Fred Akalin <akalin@google.com>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Osama Mazahir <OSAMAM@microsoft.com>, Hervé Ruellan <ruellan.crf@gmail.com>
- Message-ID: <CAP+FsNfAfbyorTaLU3MBSHj-UMxmdd8adRxROjXCdsbRFAtC7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Seems reasonable to me. Make an issue so it can be discussed? On Oct 25, 2013 9:52 AM, "Fred Akalin" <akalin@google.com> wrote: > It seems tricky to me for an endpoint to use less than > SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE for its encoding state, especially since it > still has to use SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE for its decoding state. > > Since we already need an ack for a header table size change, can we > perhaps piggyback a negotiated size (guaranteed to be <= the advertised > size) onto that ack? So a client can just send > SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE=5MB, and a memory-constraint server can ack with > SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE=4K, and both sides will then use 4K. > > > On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Hervé Ruellan <ruellan.crf@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Hi Osama, >> >> We discussed on this topic in the thread starting at: >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2013OctDec/0221.html. >> >> Basically, an encoder can choose to keep only the first 4 KB of its >> table, discarding the rest. It will just not make any reference to the >> entries in the table above the first 4 KB. >> It the encoder wants also to reference the static table, this is more >> complex (see the referred to thread for more details). It will work if the >> maximum table size is 8 KB, and the encoder keeps only 4 KB of it, it will >> not really work if the encoder wants to only keep 4 KB of a 5MB table. >> >> Hervé. >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 4:09 AM, Osama Mazahir <OSAMAM@microsoft.com>wrote: >> >>> Based on my understanding, the encoder and decoder have to have the >>> exact same value for max-header-table-size so that the indices match. So >>> if the client advertises SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE=5MB then that means the >>> client-decoder is using a header-table with maxsize=5MB. Which means the >>> server-encoder also has to use a header-table of maxsize=5MB. But if the >>> server only wants to use 4KB of encoder space then after storing 4KB worth >>> of header name/values, it can only reuse from the initially stored 4KB or >>> emit literals (either as-is or Huffman encoded).**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> So it seems to bound its memory usage, the server (in the above example) >>> has to be choosy in what it adds to the server-encoder header-table because >>> once something is added it cannot be removed (unless it decides to expand >>> to 5MB+)?**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Thanks,**** >>> >>> --Osama.**** >>> >> >> >
Received on Friday, 25 October 2013 16:55:59 UTC