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

Re: #540: "jumbo" frames

From: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 13:24:06 -0700
Message-ID: <CAP+FsNfKBazaKL4a8PE8mMtCdFhKj1tyXQ-6twAF=rW_X9Ehzg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>, Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>, Jason Greene <jason.greene@redhat.com>, Nicholas Hurley <hurley@todesschaf.org>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, K.Morgan@iaea.org, Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>, IETF HTTP WG <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Martin Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
I don't see how CONTINUATION makes a hardware implementation more
difficult, though?
It doesn't at all change the buffer management.
-=R


On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
wrote:

> In message <CAP+FsNcwTBLjn+CV0gnrpG_87U=
> xetOJsqoyFF5Ze+w_Ucwfpg@mail.gmail.com>
> , Roberto Peon writes:
>
> >Look at this from a hardware engineer's perspective. This bit changes how
> >you must structure hardware buffers in order to parse things properly.
> >This requires far more complexity for a hardware implementation, and would
> >reduce the chance that we get acceleration in HW for HTTP2.
>
> But the elimination of CONTINUATION would more than offset that minor
> bit of complexity.
>
>
> --
> Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
> phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
> FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
> Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
>
Received on Wednesday, 25 June 2014 20:24:33 UTC

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