Re:Http2 explained
by pdkl95 on Friday February 13, 2015 @12:31PM
(#9045533)
It is never a good idea to assume that a can opener[1] will always be available. While your decoder - an extra tool - may be available in "many" cases, there will always be a sizable minority of cases where it isn't. As the performance benefits of fixed-width fields are orthogonal to the fields being ASCII-vs-binary.
> SCTP / "transport-layer protocol"
So we move yet another step down the path of obsoleting TCP port numbers by adding another layer of indirection[2]. Re-implementing ports by tunneling everything over HTTP{,2} was a bad idea when it started over a decade ago, and it's still the wrong way to solve the problem.
Re:Http2 explained
by derefr on Friday February 13, 2015 @03:15PM
(#9046909)
The real problem is that flow control needs to happen at the pair-of-machines level. If we had that, opening 1000 "stream" connections to a server would be exactly the same as opening a single 1000-channel SCTP connection.
> SCTP / "transport-layer protocol"
So we move yet another step down the path of obsoleting TCP port numbers by adding another layer of indirection[2]. Re-implementing ports by tunneling everything over HTTP{,2} was a bad idea when it started over a decade ago, and it's still the wrong way to solve the problem.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assume_a_can_opener
[2] See RFC 1925, Section 2, rule 11a. ( https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1925 )