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

Re: H2 HEADERS and flow control

From: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2014 15:54:58 +1000
Message-ID: <CAH_y2NF=7V=ayOEEfepMoZiZcXvuex9-WEcvgyZLD2PkR4=r5w@mail.gmail.com>
To: David Krauss <potswa@gmail.com>
Cc: Nicholas Hurley <hurley@todesschaf.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 4 July 2014 15:28, David Krauss <potswa@gmail.com> wrote:

> Correct me if I’m wrong!

Whilst what I'm advocating could be somewhat implemented by self
control/priorty I don't think it can entirely be done so, and certainly not
just by the server.

Currently a browser that has just sent a 64KB header is free to immediately
send another 64KB of data without any say so from the server.  This will
effectively give that client twice the share of any shared connections from
load balancer to app server vs a browser that sends small headers.

If the header size was included in the flow control calculations, then the
browser would have to wait for a WINDOW_UPDATE after sending a 64KB header
before it could send any data.   It would thus be only able to take the
same share of any amalgamated connection as a small header sender.


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 Friday, 4 July 2014 05:55:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 30 March 2016 09:57:09 UTC