Roberto,
CONTINUATION will not make hardware implementations more difficult, because
they (like many other implementations) will just not implement continuation
support.
cheers
On 25 June 2014 22:24, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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.
>>
>
>
--
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.