On 28 May 2014 03:59, David Krauss <potswa@gmail.com> wrote: > I’ve not implemented HPACK, but what works for a big server handling a > million connections should usually work for a tiny MCU. Indeed this is very true! As somebody who has implement a server handling a million connections, I've very much concerned by the resource requirements implied by HTTP/2 for a server. Not only does a server have to commit to storing the headers that can result from a 16k compressed header frames, but it may receive unlimited CONTINUATION frames after that. Sure a server can opt not to accept large headers, but if HTTP/2 is going to facilitate a web where browsers can and do send such large headers, then all that would do would be for that server to opt out of the web. I just do not see the need for the transport meta data channel for HTTP/2 to grow beyond the current size. After all, we are only trying to support what is done with HTTP/1.1 now, so 8K headers should be sufficient and any new applications for large metadata can put it in a data stream! So with my tin foil hat on, I see conspiracy!) I'm told nobody is going to send servers such big headers... so why then are going to such lengths to support them in the protocol? cheers -- Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com> http://eclipse.org/jetty HTTP, SPDY, Websocket server and client that scales http://www.webtide.com advice and support for jetty and cometd.
Received on Wednesday, 28 May 2014 10:20:23 UTC