- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2022 08:38:06 +0000
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- cc: Tommy Pauly <tpauly@apple.com>, Roberto Polli <robipolli@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
-------- Mark Nottingham writes: > IMO the only reason we'd choose an integer textual representation is if we > didn't believe that [binary structured fields are going to happen]. I disagree. First, we are never going to get 100% penetration for a binary serialization, and it will take about five years for any significant uptake of it. Second, the efficiency arguments are invariant of the existence of binary serializations, because most of the actual HTTP header processing HTTP headers will not operate on the binary serialization in the first place. Third, there are many efficiency arguments for integer textural representation, even without considering binary serializations: * takes up less space in files and on the wire * compresses better. * is faster and uses less instructions/energy to produce and parse * is easier and less error-prone to produce and parse So I really dont see binary structured fields as particularly relevant for this decision, if anything, they just add one more efficiency argument: * is faster/uses less instructions/energy and easier to (de)serialize as binary. Poul-Henning -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Wednesday, 24 August 2022 08:38:24 UTC