Am I the only person that thinks that if shaving 50ms off HTTP latency is a
worthwhile goal it would be more appropriate to look at a DNS based
signaling mechanism that is going to support that goal (and also do the
right thing for IPv4/6) rather than look at various ways to coax the desired
behavior from the legacy infrastructure.
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Brian E Carpenter <
brian(_dot_)e(_dot_)carpenter(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
On 2010-06-25 20:08, Carsten Bormann wrote:
On Jun 25, 2010, at 09:56, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
trying v6 for a couple of seconds before trying v4 in parallel
I don't think this is realistic for applications like the Web, where
people are now creating Youtube-Spots with high-speed cameras that show, in
slow-motion, a potato cannon fired in parallel with a web page loading (the
web page is faster than the potato, of course).
Shaving 50 ms off the HTTP latency is a major improvement in user
experience for a Web user.
I think we're talking about the initial phase of contact with a server.
Obviously,
once a best path is chosen, you will stick to it until there is a glitch.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
--
Website: http://hallambaker.com/
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf