New Version Notification - draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-11.txt

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
16 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

New Version Notification - draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-11.txt

Internet-Drafts

A new version (-11) has been submitted for draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-11.txt


The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression/

Diff from previous version:
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-11

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

IETF Secretariat.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-11.txt

Barry Leiba-2
This version is ready, and addresses all the comments you think need
to be addressed?

Barry

On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 9:22 AM,  <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> A new version (-11) has been submitted for draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-11.txt
>
>
> The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression/
>
> Diff from previous version:
> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-11
>
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>
> IETF Secretariat.
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-11.txt

Julian Reschke-2
On 2015-02-10 16:36, Barry Leiba wrote:
> This version is ready, and addresses all the comments you think need
> to be addressed?
>
> Barry
> ...


For the record: the static table still contains a header field name
that's not registered ("refresh"), and I doubt that it's actually used a
lot on the wire.

I asked about this during LC
(<https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2015JanMar/0074.html>),
and it would be nice if there was at least an explanation why this can
not be fixed at this time.

Best regards, Julian

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-11.txt

RUELLAN Herve
I overlooked this specific comment.

I just created a pull request for handling it:
https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/pull/714

I can publish a new draft for this and any other comment I would have
missed.

Cheers,

Hervé.

On 02/10/2015 05:01 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> On 2015-02-10 16:36, Barry Leiba wrote:
>> This version is ready, and addresses all the comments you think need
>> to be addressed?
>>
>> Barry
>> ...
>
>
> For the record: the static table still contains a header field name
> that's not registered ("refresh"), and I doubt that it's actually used a
> lot on the wire.
>
> I asked about this during LC
> (<https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2015JanMar/0074.html>),
> and it would be nice if there was at least an explanation why this can
> not be fixed at this time.
>
> Best regards, Julian



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-11.txt

Julian Reschke
On 2015-02-10 19:07, Hervé Ruellan wrote:

> I overlooked this specific comment.
>
> I just created a pull request for handling it:
> https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/pull/714
>
> I can publish a new draft for this and any other comment I would have
> missed.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Hervé.

Thanks a lot. That explains the state of the table (another oversight is
the presence of T-E, no?).

I'd still prefer to actually fix the table, given the fact that
implementations will have to update the ALPN identifier anyway...

Best regards, Julian

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-11.txt

Simpson, Robby (GE Energy Management)
PLEASE, if the static table is open for _minor_ modifications, also
consider these two (I can hear the moans from here):
1) Lexicographical ordering ("accept" should come before "accept-charset")
2) Default header values instead of nothing at all (see
https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/587)



At a minimum, perhaps some wording like in the PR for #1, as I'm sure its
going to cause implementation issues..

- Robby


On 2/10/15, 2:06 PM, "Julian Reschke" <[hidden email]> wrote:

>On 2015-02-10 19:07, Hervé Ruellan wrote:
>> I overlooked this specific comment.
>>
>> I just created a pull request for handling it:
>> https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/pull/714
>>
>> I can publish a new draft for this and any other comment I would have
>> missed.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Hervé.
>
>Thanks a lot. That explains the state of the table (another oversight is
>the presence of T-E, no?).
>
>I'd still prefer to actually fix the table, given the fact that
>implementations will have to update the ALPN identifier anyway...
>
>Best regards, Julian
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-11.txt

Martin Thomson-3
In reply to this post by RUELLAN Herve
On 11 February 2015 at 05:07, Hervé Ruellan <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I just created a pull request for handling it:
> https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/pull/714

At this point, an RFC Editor's note is probably more appropriate:

With some of my own edits:

OLD:
-                The static table was created by listing the most common
-                header fields that are valid for messages exchanged inside a
-                HTTP/2 connection.
NEW:
+                The static table was created from the most frequent header
+                fields used by popular web sites, with the addition of
+                HTTP/2-specific pseudo-header fields
+                (see <xref target="HTTP2" x:fmt="of"
+                    x:rel="#PseudoHeaderFields"/>).

I would not keep the explanation about why the list isn't as good as
we know it could be.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-11.txt

Julian Reschke
On 2015-02-11 03:41, Martin Thomson wrote:
> On 11 February 2015 at 05:07, Hervé Ruellan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> I just created a pull request for handling it:
>> https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/pull/714
>
> At this point, an RFC Editor's note is probably more appropriate:

Why? The spec isn't even approved yet, no?

> With some of my own edits:
>
> OLD:
> -                The static table was created by listing the most common
> -                header fields that are valid for messages exchanged inside a
> -                HTTP/2 connection.
> NEW:
> +                The static table was created from the most frequent header
> +                fields used by popular web sites, with the addition of
> +                HTTP/2-specific pseudo-header fields
> +                (see <xref target="HTTP2" x:fmt="of"
> +                    x:rel="#PseudoHeaderFields"/>).
>
> I would not keep the explanation about why the list isn't as good as
> we know it could be.

I absolutely think that it's needed, because otherwise the same question
is going to come up again and again.

The best fix of course would be to fix the list. I don't understand why
that is so hard.

Best regards, Julian

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-11.txt

Julian Reschke-2
On 2015-02-11 08:45, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 2015-02-11 03:41, Martin Thomson wrote:
>> On 11 February 2015 at 05:07, Hervé Ruellan
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> I just created a pull request for handling it:
>>> https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/pull/714
>>
>> At this point, an RFC Editor's note is probably more appropriate:
>
> Why? The spec isn't even approved yet, no?

Oh, indeed it was. Silly me.

> ...


Best regards, Julian

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-11.txt

RUELLAN Herve
In reply to this post by Martin Thomson-3
Works with me.

Hervé.

On 02/11/2015 03:41 AM, Martin Thomson wrote:

> On 11 February 2015 at 05:07, Hervé Ruellan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> I just created a pull request for handling it:
>> https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/pull/714
>
> At this point, an RFC Editor's note is probably more appropriate:
>
> With some of my own edits:
>
> OLD:
> -                The static table was created by listing the most common
> -                header fields that are valid for messages exchanged inside a
> -                HTTP/2 connection.
> NEW:
> +                The static table was created from the most frequent header
> +                fields used by popular web sites, with the addition of
> +                HTTP/2-specific pseudo-header fields
> +                (see <xref target="HTTP2" x:fmt="of"
> +                    x:rel="#PseudoHeaderFields"/>).
>
> I would not keep the explanation about why the list isn't as good as
> we know it could be.
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-11.txt

Greg Wilkins-3
In reply to this post by Julian Reschke

On 11 February 2015 at 18:45, Julian Reschke <[hidden email]> wrote:
The best fix of course would be to fix the list. I don't understand why that is so hard.

Wow,  I really think the IETF needs to consider their process if simple stupid things like this can be detected by the process and still not fixed.

I thought we had just deferred the fixing of the table until a breaking binary change - and surely updating from h2-14 to h2-17 and then eventually to h2 is a binary breaking change that would have allowed us to fix the table?

So it is a distinct possibility that we will carry these errors in this table for decades.   Somebody should calculate the carbon emissions we are going to be responsible for because we didn't go for the small efficiency gains on offer with an optimised table!

I know I say this a lot, but EPIC FAIL! 

--
Greg Wilkins <[hidden email]>  @  Webtide - an Intalio subsidiary
http://eclipse.org/jetty HTTP, SPDY, Websocket server and client that scales
http://www.webtide.com  advice and support for jetty and cometd.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-11.txt

Mark Nottingham-2
Greg,

> On 13 Feb 2015, at 12:06 pm, Greg Wilkins <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On 11 February 2015 at 18:45, Julian Reschke <[hidden email]> wrote:
> The best fix of course would be to fix the list. I don't understand why that is so hard.
>
> Wow,  I really think the IETF needs to consider their process if simple stupid things like this can be detected by the process and still not fixed.
>
> I thought we had just deferred the fixing of the table until a breaking binary change - and surely updating from h2-14 to h2-17 and then eventually to h2 is a binary breaking change that would have allowed us to fix the table?

Those aren't breaking changes -- i.e., they don't change the format.

>
> So it is a distinct possibility that we will carry these errors in this table for decades.   Somebody should calculate the carbon emissions we are going to be responsible for because we didn't go for the small efficiency gains on offer with an optimised table!
>
> I know I say this a lot, but EPIC FAIL!  

Yes...


--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-11.txt

Julian Reschke
On 2015-02-13 06:36, Mark Nottingham wrote:

> Greg,
>
>> On 13 Feb 2015, at 12:06 pm, Greg Wilkins <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On 11 February 2015 at 18:45, Julian Reschke <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> The best fix of course would be to fix the list. I don't understand why that is so hard.
>>
>> Wow,  I really think the IETF needs to consider their process if simple stupid things like this can be detected by the process and still not fixed.
>>
>> I thought we had just deferred the fixing of the table until a breaking binary change - and surely updating from h2-14 to h2-17 and then eventually to h2 is a binary breaking change that would have allowed us to fix the table?
>
> Those aren't breaking changes -- i.e., they don't change the format.
> ...

For a definition of "format" I happen to disagree with :-)


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-11.txt

Poul-Henning Kamp
In reply to this post by Greg Wilkins-3
--------
In message <CAH_y2NE5Yi+XixocVmGJmYjqFxSXdAhnnbLu=[hidden email]>
, Greg Wilkins writes:

>I know I say this a lot, but EPIC FAIL!

+1

--
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[hidden email]         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-11.txt

Amos Jeffries-2
On 14/02/2015 12:19 a.m., Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> --------
> In message <CAH_y2NE5Yi+XixocVmGJmYjqFxSXdAhnnbLu=[hidden email]>
> , Greg Wilkins writes:
>
>> I know I say this a lot, but EPIC FAIL!
>
> +1
>


+1 more

Amos

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-11.txt

Jason Greene

> On Feb 13, 2015, at 4:29 PM, Amos Jeffries <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On 14/02/2015 12:19 a.m., Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>> --------
>> In message <CAH_y2NE5Yi+XixocVmGJmYjqFxSXdAhnnbLu=[hidden email]>
>> , Greg Wilkins writes:
>>
>>> I know I say this a lot, but EPIC FAIL!
>>
>> +1
>
>
> +1 more

h2.1? :)