RE: Generality of HTTP
On 23 Jan 2002, Simon St.Laurent wrote: > And HTTP 1.1 has lots of parts I don't consider remotely necessary for > client-server work. At least they're generally optional, though. > It might be interesting to take close look at HTTP > as a likely candidate for subsetting. GET, POST, a few headers. > > Won't get rid of TCP's overhead, but it could simplify some kinds of > processing without leaping to an entirely new spec. But consider this - HTTP over UDP: http://research.sun.com/techrep/1999/abstract-71.html To summarise, the client tries UDP first. If it gets no response or an error (the server is a normal TCP-only HTTP server), it then tries again with TCP. If the server supports UDP and the response is only a few Kb, it replies with UDP, otherwise it just sends back the headers and a flag telling the client to use TCP to get the body. GET requests are perfect for UDP - just retransmit a few times if nothing happens, since it doesn't matter if they get repeated. ABS -- Alaric B. Snell http://www.alaric-snell.com/ http://RFC.net/ http://www.warhead.org.uk/ Any sufficiently advanced technology can be emulated in software
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format