- From: Jason Greene <jason.greene@redhat.com>
- Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 22:29:04 -0500
- To: Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com>
- Cc: David Krauss <potswa@gmail.com>, "William Chan (???)" <willchan@chromium.org>, Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com>, Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Jul 8, 2014, at 10:20 PM, Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com> wrote: >> Hey Jeff, >> >> How is this different to you from dynamically adjusting the header table size? >> > > I see it differently because the compressor (at least in my > implementation and so I realize I definitely could be biased) lives > above the framing codec. The low-level framer emits "header block > fragments" to the session processing code which then emits "header > fields" to the application. Ok so, what you don’t like then is your framing layer having to inspect a settings frame? If so, don’t you also have the same issue with extensions? Although I guess a key difference there is they are once per connection. -- Jason T. Greene WildFly Lead / JBoss EAP Platform Architect JBoss, a division of Red Hat
Received on Wednesday, 9 July 2014 03:29:43 UTC