Re: HTTP Session Extension draft
Jon Knight (J.P.Knight@lut.ac.uk)
Fri, 7 Jul 1995 08:46:00 +0100 (BST)
On Thu, 6 Jul 1995, Chuck Shotton wrote:
> >The reason is that the number of TIME_WAIT entries is directly related
> >to the number of TCP connections used. If you use sessions (what I
> >called in my paper "persistent connections"), you need to create fewer
> >TCP connections for the same number of retrievals. So you end up
> >with fewer TIME_WAIT entries.
>
> This is irrelevant on platforms with a limited number of TCP/IP streams
> that can be formed. People discussing this issue are right to refer to
> "irresponsible use" of TCP/IP connections.
If you happen to have a TCP/IP implementation that doesn't permit you to
have lots of streams open, just don't bother implementing this HTTP
Session Extension in your server (or even client); things will still work
ok for the older browsers and servers that don't understand the new
protocol addition. I don't see why those of us with sensible platforms
that might be able to take advantage of a potential performance gain
shouldn't just because a Mac can't handle lots of TCP connections without
falling over. That's like saying inlined images in HTML should never be
used because some people use text based browsers.
Jon
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Jon Knight, Researcher, Sysop and General Dogsbody, Department of Computer
Studies, Loughborough University of Technology, Leics., ENGLAND. LE11 3TU.
*** Nothing looks so like a man of sense as a fool who holds his tongue ***