W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2014

Re: http2 Working Code

From: Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au>
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2014 07:26:13 +1000
Message-ID: <CACweHNA5NHyMyENDskj+FyCXmh8usY++JNv1aJtay89TJfz6rA@mail.gmail.com>
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 13 June 2014 22:42, Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com> wrote:

>
> So Jetty's had a working http2 implementation for less that 48 hours and
> I'm already feeling the affect of working code in as much as some of my
> vocal opposition to some hpack/http2 design is melting away.    When asked
> "should we make a provision for optionally flow controlling headers?", my
> response was - nah it is too difficult to do without radical change, so
> we'll just have to reject connections that send big headers.
>
> However, I'm not100% sure if my acceptance is really for good technical
> reasons, or just because of some kind of Stockholm syndrome.
>

​
​For what it's worth, even without a fully implemented HTTP stack, once my
experimental HPACK+Huffman code was written and verified to at least
theoretically interop [1], all the implementation pain sort of evaporated,
so I'm in pretty much the same boat as Greg.

HPACK felt painful to implement, but - at least in my case - it wasn't
actually hard. And libraries are starting to become available, so the pain
can be avoided if you don't mind flirting with a potential future
monoculture.


[1] it correctly parsed stories from
https://github.com/http2jp/hpack-test-case/
​

-- 
  Matthew Kerwin
  http://matthew.kerwin.net.au/
Received on Friday, 13 June 2014 21:26:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:31 UTC