• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: Generality of HTTP
• From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
• Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 10:40:11 -0500
• In-reply-to: <Pine.NEB.4.33.0201231512110.11412-100000@l...>

1/23/2002 10:15:25 AM, "Al B. Snell" <alaric@a...> wrote:


>
> GET requests are perfect for UDP - just retransmit a 
> few times if nothing happens, since it doesn't 
> matter if they get repeated.

Stealing a page from Tim Bray's hymnal <grin>, I feel compelled to 
ask:  Is there solid, empirical, profiling evidence that the TCP 
substrate of HTTP is a significant bottleneck in real web 
applications?  Optimizing non-bottlenecks is a well-known 
temptation...

It's nice to know that these multicast-friendly, low-overhead UDP-
based techniques exist, and I'm happy that my local 911 dispatchers 
can use Len's products to do their good work reliably, but I'm 
wondering how relevant this discussion is to most of us.

The network effect (literally and figuratively) behind TCP and HTTP 
is a terrible thing to waste.

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Generality of HTTP
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
  • Re: Generality of HTTP
    • From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>
  • RE: Generality of HTTP
    • From: Al Snell <alaric@a...>

• References:
  • RE: Generality of HTTP
    • From: "Al B. Snell" <alaric@a...>

• Prev by Date: RE: RE: Draft US gov't XML Developer's Guide
• Next by Date: Re: RDDL and document types was : Re: Thetask to be solved by RDDL.
• Previous by thread: RE: Generality of HTTP
• Next by thread: RE: Generality of HTTP
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread