W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > January 2015

Re: Draft finding - "Transitioning the Web to HTTPS"

From: Eric J. Bowman <eric@bisonsystems.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 19:25:07 -0700
To: Chris Palmer <palmer@google.com>
Cc: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>, "Michael[tm] Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@hsivonen.fi>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, Public TAG List <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20150119192507.5c48cdb29c54a9270be12b9e@bisonsystems.net>
Chris Palmer wrote:
> Noah Mendelsohn wrote:
> > [1] http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/NoSnooping.html
> """This takes a lot of server CPU cycles, making server farms more
> expensive. It would slow the user's computer. It would effectively
> slow down the whole net."""
> That was not true in 2009, and it's certainly not true now.

Show me any review of Celeron or Sempron server CPUs on tomshardware or
anandtech which support your contention. I'm a dinosaur who'd rather
purchase old systems vs. new CPUs in the $50-$60 range to handle way
more unencrypted Web traffic, but I see TBL's point (then and now) vis-
a-vis server farms. Especially when I look at "cloud" hosting rates
nowadays -- at these prices I can't cost-justify retaining independence
by running my own hardware, assuming ubiquitous HTTPS.

User CPUs are now soldered on with integrated GPUs, but I think we can
agree that's irrelevant to user-perceived performance nowadays, even
back in 2009. Network slowdowns are ulikely, but more expensive server
farms is spot-on from my POV.

Please don't leave it to me, or TBL, to undertake the research showing
how much of the Web is hosted on Celeron and Sempron processors, or
shows how badly their performance degrades when handling HTTPS-centric
loads. IMNSHO, claiming that even 5+ years ago this was a fallacy, puts
the onus on you to back it up with verifiable numbers which discount
what I've been reading on tomshardware, anandtech, etc. regarding CPU
performance on Web workloads over that timeframe.

Your arguments assume various processor enhancements which have yet to
filter down, with no guarantee they will anytime soon; after this many
years I'm not willing to bank on promises they will at the $50-$60 CPU
cost driving the commodity webhosting/cloud industries. I'm also not
willing to assume that budget hosting plays on Celeron and Sempron CPUs
falls under the 80/20 Mendoza line.

What I don't have, is the wherewithal to undertake such research
myself. Had it occured to me, I'd certainly have collected an arsenal of
bookmarks supporting my contention for the sake of future mailing-list
discussions. My first multi-core CPU was what, 2002-ish? But just made
it to Celeron last year? This tells me that optimizations for ubiquitous
HTTPS are a ways off for budget server CPU purchasers, unless proven
otherwise, based on experience.

Received on Tuesday, 20 January 2015 02:26:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:57:09 UTC