On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 4:30 PM, Daniel Farina <daniel@heroku.com> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Dobes Vandermeer <dobesv@gmail.com> wrote: >> Virtual hosts. Same port.>> I think SPDY or like-protocols [...] give a crisp treatment to
>> interactive, stateful workloads involving >> >> back-and-forth between client and server with multiplexing, fixing >> some problems with the hacks in HTTP-land from before. > > It sounds like at some level you're really talking about replacing the > built-in protocol with SPDY because SPDY is possibly a better baseline than > updating the existing protocol. That's an interesting idea, I think this > project could evolve in that direction if there's demand for it.
If only so there is a smaller set of arbitrary decisions to make about how to delimit messages...but if SPDY doesn't get widely deployed, or exacts an unacceptable performance penalty, it is game over.
Well, in our case HTTP is a clear win (but not replacement) and SPDY a potential one (even as a replacement). Even if SPDY is not widely adopted it could still replace FEBE if there's a clear advantage to using it, I don't know enough to make the call right now.
