Re: Submitted new I-D: Cache Digests for HTTP/2

On 2 February 2016 at 12:45, Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com> wrote:
>> From my point of view and understanding a cache-digest will probably require
>> some per client "cache-digest dictionary" which can cause some issues to
>> systems\servers with lots of clients\connections. The other side would be
>> the ongoing re-validation and maintenance of this dictionaries.
>
> That is a fair argument.  However, servers are already required to
> maintain such dictionary for HTTP/2 (i.e. HPACK).


Note that a server would not be required to support cache-digest.  It
can ignore it entirely and push willy-nilly.  Or it can use the extra
information as it appears to optimize.  Also, contrary to what is
implied here, you don't need to maintain this as extra state if you
are happy to consume the header field on every request.

Received on Tuesday, 2 February 2016 02:55:12 UTC