- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 15:24:45 +1100
- To: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
- Cc: Shigeki Ohtsu <ohtsu@iij.ad.jp>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
That's not where we're at, Greg. The current stance on changing the static table was that we'd do so *if* we've agreed to make other breaking changes. Thanks, On 7 Oct 2014, at 2:14 pm, Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com> wrote: > > On 7 October 2014 12:47, Shigeki Ohtsu <ohtsu@iij.ad.jp> wrote: > If we reduce a number of static header entries, it would be have a more chance for > a dynamic header to be referred in the index less than 63. > > That could be a good compromise. Seeing that three appears to be some consensus to tweak the table a bit (add static values), then I'd certainly consider dropping a few of the least frequent static entries to free up some 1 byte encoding slots for some dynamic entries. > > Is the original data used for the frequency analysis still available? I'm happy to extract the candidates to be dropped (and suggested values) from the test data, but it is not that large and I don't know how representative it is. > > If somebody can make the data available, I'm happy to generate a pull request for a static table with more values and a few less entries. > > cheers > > -- > 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. -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 7 October 2014 04:25:18 UTC