- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 13:51:52 +1100
- To: Andy Green <andy@warmcat.com>
- Cc: Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>, hybi <hybi@ietf.org>, Cory Benfield <cory@lukasa.co.uk>, Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:38 PM, Andy Green <andy@warmcat.com> wrote: > Here's what I think it means for RTT... first the default as it is > > Client Server > > - SETTINGS - SETTINGS > - GET /index.html > - 200 HEADERS + DATA > > - :method CONNECT > - 200 HEADERS > > - DATA ws handshake > - DATA ws handshake final > > - DATA ... - DATA... > > So after the h2 link is up, he needs 3 x roundtrips to send some ws data. I think that you are exaggerating the cost here. The ws handshake and CONNECT can be sent together. The only real burden that Patrick's design adds is the need to test that the server is willing to use this design. FWIW, if this were me, I would look at trimming the websocket handshake instead. Much of the overhead there is what will hurt the overall latency. If you took the setting as an indication that this was an acceptable protocol, you could remove all the Upgrade business and just start sending ws frames. But I think that Patrick is right to start with the minimal thing; I would recommend only doing that with a new protocol identifier.
Received on Monday, 16 October 2017 02:52:33 UTC