- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 18:09:55 -0700
- To: Kris Zyp <kzyp@sitepen.com>
- Cc: Morgan L <morganl.webkit@yahoo.com>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, public-webapi@w3.org
On Mar 10, 2008, at 7:34 AM, Kris Zyp wrote: >> If the problem we are trying to solve is preventing potentially >> long- lived requests from blowing out the connection limit I think >> it would be better to either: >> >> 1) Add an explicit XHR property that indicates this request may be >> long-lived - this would not only bypass the connection limit but >> would also indicate to the UA that it should not pipeline other >> requests on the same connection, if it supports pipelining. >> >> 2) Never count XHR-initiated http requests towards the per-server >> connection limit. >> .... not seem necessary for the goal of bypassing the connection >> limit on the UA side. And it seems that an explicit XHR property >> for this would be more clear. > I agree, I think #1 is the way to go. I don't like #2, because > connection limits really are valuable for minimizing server load, > and even can help prevent DOS attacks. As I just mentioned in the > other email, "Connection: close" is not an appropriate form of > advice, IMO. I think that an explicit property that provides advice > for UAs is best approach, and that it should be a number-based > advice, not a boolean, so that it could be used more effectively and > flexibly in heuristic algorithms for making informed pipelining > decisions. Can you be more specific in what you mean about "number-based advice"? (Apologies if you explained this in an earlier message, I tried skimming them and did not find a description). Regards, Maciej
Received on Tuesday, 11 March 2008 01:18:38 UTC