Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Framing QCRAM payloads (#1122)

From: afrind <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2018 13:32:45 -0800

In #1121, there was some discussion about the value in framing header updates within HEADERS frames for two reasons:  1) the length field of headers means that decoders do not need to handle partial instructions and 2) the decoder uses the group of headers included in the HEADERS block as a signal for when to generate a HEADERS_ACK, which updates the encoder's view of decoder state.

There was also discussion about the cost of this framing for table updates.  On my admittedly small sample size of 1 HAR file, adding 6 bytes of framing per control block didn't change the compression ratio.  251 requests across 7 origins generated 29 control stream updates, adding 174 bytes of overhead.  This doesn't include the QUIC framing since you pay that cost even if you don't frame the header updates.

If we move updates off the control stream, per #1121, we can reduce the framing overhead further, at some cost to code reusability.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1122#issuecomment-371631536