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

Re: Call for Consensus: Remove "reference set" from HPACK (to address #552)

From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 08:40:36 +0200
To: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20140716064036.GG14304@1wt.eu>
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 04:19:41PM +1000, Greg Wilkins wrote:
> On 16 July 2014 16:08, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote:
> 
> > I mean, the current design allows you to have a header field whose value
> > changes between consecutive requests (eg: a proxy aggregating multiple
> > users' requests), and still have that changing value referenced with
> > little overhead.
> >
> 
> That is still possible.
> 
> If one user sends a field
> 
>    wibble: now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of the party
> 
> that will be sent literal name and value and will go into the header
> table.  Then when another user sends
> 
>   wibble: the moon is blue to a fish in love
> 
> That can be sent as a literal, but with indexed name - pointing to the
> previous entry (but the value is ignored).
> 
> Now both fields are in the table and both can be used with a single index
> reference.  If they are in the first 64, then it is only a single byte.

Then I must be missing something because in 7.2.1 I'm seeing "Index (6+)".
If those 6 bits are used for the static table, I don't see how encode the
header table on 6 bits :-/

Willy
Received on Wednesday, 16 July 2014 06:41:01 UTC

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