Mailing List Archive

SPDY in Varnish ?
Just wondering what the varnish devs thoughts are on the SPDY protocol [1]
and it's likelihood of going into varnish alongside http?

[1] http://www.chromium.org/spdy

--
Simon Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz/
"To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar | eMT.


_______________________________________________
varnish-misc mailing list
varnish-misc@varnish-cache.org
http://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
Re: SPDY in Varnish ? [ In reply to ]
I'm interested in this too.

A few weeks ago Roberto De Ioris, the creator or uWSGI
(http://projects.unbit.it/uwsgi/), told me his company is working on a
uWSGI module for both Varnish and HAProxy. uWSGI is already in nginx,
and as he said, http parsing is 300% slower than uwsgi parsing and
fastcgi parsing is 80% slower.

- James


On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 6:24 PM, Simon Lyall <simon@darkmere.gen.nz> wrote:
>
> Just wondering what the varnish devs thoughts are on the SPDY protocol [1]
> and it's likelihood of going into varnish alongside http?
>
> [1] http://www.chromium.org/spdy
>
> --
> Simon Lyall  |  Very Busy  |  Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz/
> "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar | eMT.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> varnish-misc mailing list
> varnish-misc@varnish-cache.org
> http://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
>



--
Latest Blog: http://jamesthornton.com/blog/how-to-get-to-genius

_______________________________________________
varnish-misc mailing list
varnish-misc@varnish-cache.org
http://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
Re: SPDY in Varnish ? [ In reply to ]
Hi.

We've discussed SPDY several times. SPDY is interesting but it would be
premature to implement it this early. SPDY isn't even an official IETF draft
yet and Google is still experimenting with it. I think, for us to consider
implementing it, we would need at least two things to happen. 1) An IETF
standard and 2) browser adoption. Even then it might not make sense. The
earlier drafts of SPDY weren't very proxy friendly. I'm not familiar with
Googles infrastructure but they might not use generic web proxies in their
web applications so it wasn't relevant for them.

Until then I think it's better to sit tight and se who wins. HTTP-MPLEX,
Waka and SCTP are other technologies that operate in the same problem space.
We have no idea who might win.


Per.

On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 1:24 AM, Simon Lyall <simon@darkmere.gen.nz> wrote:

>
> Just wondering what the varnish devs thoughts are on the SPDY protocol [1]
> and it's likelihood of going into varnish alongside http?
>
> [1] http://www.chromium.org/spdy
>
> --
> Simon Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz/
> "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar | eMT.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> varnish-misc mailing list
> varnish-misc@varnish-cache.org
> http://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
>



--
Per Buer, CEO
Phone: +47 21 98 92 61 / Mobile: +47 958 39 117 / Skype: per.buer
*Varnish makes websites fly!*
Whitepapers <http://www.varnish-software.com/whitepapers> |
Video<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7t2Sp174eI> |
Twitter <https://twitter.com/varnishsoftware>
Re: SPDY in Varnish ? [ In reply to ]
Hi,

FWIW, Firefox 11 includes SPDY support:
http://techsplurge.com/8147/firefox-11-vs-chrome-17-released-features-3d-page-view-chrome-bookmarks-import-extensive-tests/

OTOH, it'll make debugging HTTP more difficult? ;-/

Cheers,
Anders.

On lør, apr 30, 2011 at 09:06:52am +0200, Per Buer wrote:
> We've discussed SPDY several times. SPDY is interesting but it would be
> premature to implement it this early. SPDY isn't even an official IETF draft
> yet and Google is still experimenting with it. I think, for us to consider
> implementing it, we would need at least two things to happen. 1) An IETF
> standard and 2) browser adoption. Even then it might not make sense. The
> earlier drafts of SPDY weren't very proxy friendly. I'm not familiar with
> Googles infrastructure but they might not use generic web proxies in their
> web applications so it wasn't relevant for them.
>
> Until then I think it's better to sit tight and se who wins. HTTP-MPLEX,
> Waka and SCTP are other technologies that operate in the same problem space.
> We have no idea who might win.
>
>
> Per.
>
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 1:24 AM, Simon Lyall <simon@darkmere.gen.nz> wrote:
>
> >
> > Just wondering what the varnish devs thoughts are on the SPDY protocol [1]
> > and it's likelihood of going into varnish alongside http?
> >
> > [1] http://www.chromium.org/spdy
> >
> > --
> > Simon Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz/
> > "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar | eMT.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > varnish-misc mailing list
> > varnish-misc@varnish-cache.org
> > http://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Per Buer, CEO
> Phone: +47 21 98 92 61 / Mobile: +47 958 39 117 / Skype: per.buer
> *Varnish makes websites fly!*
> Whitepapers <http://www.varnish-software.com/whitepapers> |
> Video<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7t2Sp174eI> |
> Twitter <https://twitter.com/varnishsoftware>

> _______________________________________________
> varnish-misc mailing list
> varnish-misc@varnish-cache.org
> http://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc



--
Anders.

_______________________________________________
varnish-misc mailing list
varnish-misc@varnish-cache.org
https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
Re: SPDY in Varnish ? [ In reply to ]
On Mar 20, 2012, at 5:04 PM, Anders Nordby wrote:

> FWIW, Firefox 11 includes SPDY support:
> http://techsplurge.com/8147/firefox-11-vs-chrome-17-released-features-3d-page-view-chrome-bookmarks-import-extensive-tests/
>
> OTOH, it'll make debugging HTTP more difficult? ;-/
>
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 1:24 AM, Simon Lyall <simon@darkmere.gen.nz> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Just wondering what the varnish devs thoughts are on the SPDY protocol [1]
>>> and it's likelihood of going into varnish alongside http?
>>>
>>> [1] http://www.chromium.org/spdy

Remember that SPDY requires SSL-npn and is a transport that goes across SSL. Currently, Varnish doesn't support SSL and I believe it isn't on the near-term roadmap.

You can run SPDY in non-SSL environments for testing, but, it will break most production browsers.
_______________________________________________
varnish-misc mailing list
varnish-misc@varnish-cache.org
https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc