Subject: [vwrap] SPDY

From: Dzonatas Sol <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 08:50:43 -0700

Seems like GOOGLE did something similar to what I did with 
"bidirectional" ReSTful combines, and they called it SPDY.

(read about SPDY near the bottom)
http://www.conceivablytech.com/6696/products/google-chrome-gets-spdy-and-an-onscreen-keyboard

 >> Google said that it saw pageload times to improve by 44 to up to 
64%. According to the company, SPDY still uses HTTP methods, headers and 
“other semantics.” <<

The difference is chrome implements a modified HTTP stack (SPDY) instead 
of being limited to HTTP itself. So far, I only see a BSD style 
denotation placed on the source files.

Maybe worthwhile to investigate to see how easy it is to add the 
ReSTful/LLSD/LLIDL combines and secure the transport within any 
specified trust domain.

-- 
--- https://twitter.com/Dzonatas_Sol ---
Web Development, Software Engineering, Virtual Reality, Consultant

---

From: Dzonatas Sol <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 09:00:20 -0700

White paper: http://www.chromium.org/spdy/spdy-whitepaper

Dzonatas Sol wrote:
> 64%. According to the company, SPDY still uses HTTP methods, headers 
> and “other semantics.” <<
>
> The difference is chrome implements a modified HTTP stack (SPDY) 
> instead of being limited to HTTP itself. So far, I only see a BSD 
> style denotation placed on the source files.
>

--

---

From: Dan Olivares <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 12:48:50 -0400

It would be nice if they could push that through the IETF.

-Dan

On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Dzonatas Sol <[email-masked]> wrote:
>> Seems like GOOGLE did something similar to what I did with "bidirectional"
>> ReSTful combines, and they called it SPDY.
>>
>> >> Google said that it saw pageload times to improve by 44 to up to 64%.
>> >> According to the company, SPDY still uses HTTP methods, headers and “other
>> >> semantics.” <<
>>
>> of being limited to HTTP itself. So far, I only see a BSD style denotation
>> placed on the source files.
>>
>> ReSTful/LLSD/LLIDL combines and secure the transport within any specified
>> trust domain.
>>
>
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> vwrap mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
>

---

From: Peter Saint-Andre <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 12:11:20 -0600

> It would be nice if they could push that through the IETF.

At IETF 80 in Prague a few weeks ago, Mike Belshe of Google made a
presentation about SPDY at the HTTPBIS WG session (and I think also the
Transport Area meeting). He reported that they are interested in working
to standardize SPDY at the IETF, but they don't want to pursue that
until they are completely happy with the technology (they feel that it
is still experimental and they want to work out more of the kinks based
on deployment experience).

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

---

From: Dzonatas Sol <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 12:04:08 -0700

Quoted from: http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2078504&cid=35782366
by: mbelshe (462412) <http://slashdot.org/%7Embelshe> writes: on Monday 
April 11, @11:56AM (#35782366 
<http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2078504&cid=35782366>)

Thanks for all the kind words on SPDY; I wish the magazine authors would 
ask before putting their own results in the titles!

Regarding standards, we're still experimenting (sorry that protocol 
changes take so long!). You can't build a new protocol without 
measuring, and we're doing just that - measuring very carefully.

Note that we aren't ignoring the standards bodies. We have presented 
this information to the IETF, and we got a lot of great feedback during 
the process. When the protocol is ready for a RFC, we'll submit one - 
but it's not ready yet.

Here are the IETF presentations on SPDY:
      http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/80/slides/tsvarea-0.pdf [ietf.org]
and
      https://www.tools.ietf.org/agenda/80/slides/httpbis-7.pdf [ietf.org]

I've also answered a few similar questions to this here: 
http://hackerne.ws/item?id=2420201 [hackerne.ws]

We love help- if you're passionate about protocols and want to lend 
implementation help, please hop onto [email-masked] Several 
independent implementations have already cropped up and the feedback 
continues to be really great.

Dan Olivares wrote:
>>>>> According to the company, SPDY still uses HTTP methods, headers and �other
>>>>> semantics.� <<
>>>>>           

--