Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-

HTTP is a pain

Name: .5h 2010-11-13 22:47

Why is HTTP so annoying?

Name: Anonymous 2010-11-14 0:22

Why is OP such a ``Faggot''?

Name: Anonymous 2010-11-14 1:49

Nice comeback, retard. Go kill yourself.

Name: Anonymous 2010-11-14 1:51

>>1
You're mother

Name: Anonymous 2010-11-14 2:18

>>3
fuck off, faggot

Name: Anonymous 2010-11-14 9:55

>>1
HTTP is good stuff, the people who created it are brilliant and 90% of the time your app should use HTTP instead of whatever dumb protocol you were going to use.  The only real problem with it is TCP slow start.

HTTP is also easy to work with using simple tools like netcat (the BSD version kicks GNU netcat's ass), telnet, and curl.  HTTP beats the pants off FTP, with the sole caveat that most people don't know how to configure an HTTP server (or client, for that matter) for uploads.  (Hint: curl -T)

Speaking of which, why is it that enterprise folks love making RPC endpoints accessible via HTTP and calling it a "REST interface"?  Are they just syphilitic degenerates, or is it that hard to think straight with the marketing department's dick that far up their nostrils?  REST is pretty much the opposite of RPC, in terms of interface design methodologies.

Name: Anonymous 2010-11-14 12:25

>>6
Unfortunately, HTTP was not particularly designed for latency.  Furthermore, the web pages transmitted today are significantly different from web pages 10 years ago and demand improvements to HTTP that could not have been anticipated when HTTP was developed. The following are some of the features of HTTP that inhibit optimal performance:

- Single request per connection. Because HTTP can only fetch one resource at a time (HTTP pipelining helps, but still enforces only a FIFO queue), a server delay of 500 ms prevents reuse of the TCP channel for additional requests.  Browsers work around this problem by using multiple connections.  Since 2008, most browsers have finally moved from 2 connections per domain to 6.

- Exclusively client-initiated requests. In HTTP, only the client can initiate a request. Even if the server knows the client needs a resource, it has no mechanism to inform the client and must instead wait to receive a request for the resource from the client.

- Uncompressed request and response headers. Request headers today vary in size from ~200 bytes to over 2KB.  As applications use more cookies and user agents expand features, typical header sizes of 700-800 bytes is common. For modems or ADSL connections, in which the uplink bandwidth is fairly low, this latency can be significant. Reducing the data in headers could directly improve the serialization latency to send requests.

- Redundant headers. In addition, several headers are repeatedly sent across requests on the same channel. However, headers such as the User-Agent, Host, and Accept* are generally static and do not need to be resent.

- Optional data compression. HTTP uses optional compression encodings for data. Content should always be sent in a compressed format.

Name: Anonymous 2010-11-14 12:49

To add something vaguely original:
the people who created it are brilliant
Yes.
HTTP is good stuff
It's not the worst quick hack protocol out there, but like most of the web it really wasn't designed for what it's actually used for today.  There's lots of reasons not to use HTTP, like the overhead it adds to small requests, the complexity added by grafting on support for efficient transfers (i.e., compression and binary data), and the lack of any reasonable support for non-ASCII headers.

Name: Anonymous 2010-11-14 12:54

>>8
the lack of any reasonable support for non-ASCII headers
In which case I propose new text/unicode and text/UTF-* MIME types to fix this exact problem

Name: Anonymous 2010-11-15 4:09

>>8

"Lack of reasonable support for non-ASCII headers" is true, but:

Μicrosoft.com

Microsoft.com

Мicrosoft.com

try c/ping these three URLS into your browser. One of them will take you to Microsoft's homepage. The other two don't work because of ASCII limitations but if they *did* work, they'd take you to respectively my creepy Ukranian scam site and my Greece-based anti-microsoft site.

Name: Anonymous 2010-11-15 11:02

>>10
That's because .com follows the ICANN guidelines for IDNs, which include measures against mixed scripts and confusables. It has nothing to do with HTTP header limitations, IDNs use Punycode.

Name: Anonymous 2010-11-15 13:40

That's a little line of code for a scheme, one giant leap for toy languages.

Name: Anonymous 2010-11-15 13:50

>>12
...Wrong thread.

Name: Anonymous 2010-11-15 15:32

>>9
lol, trolling

Name: Anonymous 2010-11-15 15:33

Have all you faggots forgot that HTTP is stateless?

Name: Anonymous 2010-11-15 19:48

>>15
Ah, I've long suspected the web is an anarchy.

But who is anarch?

Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List