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

Re: #540: "jumbo" frames

From: David Krauss <potswa@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 18:20:18 +0800
Message-Id: <A0B4597D-31B8-4DDF-8207-ADBBBF7B26A2@gmail.com>
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>

On 2014–06–25, at 5:35 PM, <K.Morgan@iaea.org> <K.Morgan@iaea.org> wrote:

> Bad idea IMO.  That would really paint HTTP/2 into a corner.  With no reserved bits left, there would never be a chance to go above 64K frames.  i.e. you could never " back-port bigger frames onto an existing protocol"

IPv6 packets only go up to 64K, so no network processor is going to get away with coarser granularity for the foreseeable future.

I’ve not been following this (my implementation is on hold as it seems HTTP/2 is going back to the drawing board) but any “jumbo frames” scheme should be amenable to hardware implementation. Needing a branchy CPU program for decoding would be painting into a corner.

Received on Wednesday, 25 June 2014 10:20:51 UTC

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