Re: Broader discussion - limit dictionary encoding to one compression algorithm?

Patrick Meenan writes:

> ** The case for a single content-encoding:
> […]
> ** The case for both Brotli and Zstandard:

First, those are not really the two choices before us.

Option one is:  Pick one single algorithm

Option two is:  Add a negotiation mechanism and seed a new IANA registry with those two algorithms

As far as I can tell, there are no credible data which shows any performance difference between the two, and no of reason to think that any future compression algorithm will do significantly better.

Therefore we can have no rational expectation of getting a better future, if we add a negotiation mechanism, an IANA registry etc.

But we do know there will be downsides.

As you already mentioned, the most probable result of allowing both, is that everybody will end up having to implement both.

In this post XZ-sabotage era that is called "Twice the attack surface for no good reason" and that answers the question.

As to how to pick one:

If you think the limitations you mention are handicapping for one of the algorithms, pick the other.

Otherwise, do a quick but credible survey, and if one of the algorithms have more than twice as many /100% independent/ implementations than the other, pick that one.  All else being equal, more 100% independent implementations means more people have looked at it carefully.  But note that for instance porting an implementation from C++ to Java is not "100% independent"

If that still does not settle it, pipe the .txt version of the currently published I-D through them both, and pick the one which has most zero bits in the output.

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 Tuesday, 21 May 2024 16:41:42 UTC