back to article IETF bakes Google's SPDY protocol into HTTP 2.0

Google's SPDY (speedy) protocol has been adopted by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) for use in the forthcoming HTTP 2.0 standard. Google developed SPDY as part of its ongoing efforts to speed up the Web. While its work to do so isn't entirely altruistic – a faster web means more users doing more on Google – the …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

...adopted by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) for "us"?

..typo but very telling... I suppose "we" wont be sued by Larry et al a few years down the road eh?

0
0
Bronze badge
WTF?

Someone explain this to me:

"SPDY improves page load times by 15 per cent, and was designed to halve the time needed to load a page"

So:

"improves page load times by 15 per cent": page load time = 85%

"halve the time needed to load a page": page load time = 50%

Which is it?

2
2
Silver badge

Re: Someone explain this to me:

"Which is it?"

I noticed that too and assume, possibly incorrectly, that the two figures were current gains in speed vs. expected gains in speed as the spec becomes more widely and better implemented and supported.

2
0
Silver badge

Re: Someone explain this to me:

Missing an "at least" or an "up to". A page like forbes.com articles would doubtless be halved. El Reg's simpler layout and such more like 15%.

Of course, that's in optimal cases. Nothing SPDY can do about latency introduced by must-load ad affiliate networks blocking page rendering, and not responding for ten seconds at a time.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: "must-load ad affiliate networks"

"latency introduced by must-load ad affiliate networks blocking page rendering, and not responding for ten seconds at a time."

Are there really people that stupid still around?

0
1
Bronze badge
WTF?

Re: Someone explain this to me:

Really? Two downvotes because I pointed out what seemed to me like an inconsistency?

0
1
Silver badge

15% increase?

Perhaps there is indeed something in it, but to me 15% is nothing more than proof of concept. Here's hoping they make it to 150 - then I'll notice it.

0
0
Silver badge

150% increase?

You want the page three seconds before you request it?

0
1
Silver badge

Re: 150% increase?

Google knows what pages and adverts you wish to see, so provides them before you decide to click the link.

That's Web 3.0!

1
0
Silver badge

SPDY introduces two layers of protocol. The lower layer is a general purpose framing layer which can be used atop a reliable transport (likely TCP) for multiplexed, prioritized, and compressed data communication of many concurrent streams.

So they've reinvented SCTP ?

2
0
LDS
Silver badge

Oh well, the reinvented tcp (but rigorously over HTTP - LOL!) as well. The problem with Google is they have no long term goal design for their products, including protocols. They need quick and dirty hacks to deliver something working asap. Google should be kept as much aways as possible from Internet protocols, unless we want an Internet built on ill-designed protocols just because Google needs something to make its ill-designed webapps work.

1
2
Bronze badge

so

About the same as adblock then?

3
1
Silver badge

Opera has supported SPDY for at least two stable versions already. You get a nice little lightning icon colour itself when it's in use.

Yet again, the browser that has all this before the others doesn't even get a mention in preference to Amazon's Silk (which I had to go look up what the hell that was).

0
1
Bronze badge

Yep

Disgruntled Opera user here as well - never seems to get a mention hey. It slightly worries me that apparently no-one at El Reg is savvy enough to use Opera. It's not the only good option, obviously, but it's bad that no-one seems to use it.

0
1
(Written by Reg staff) Silver badge

Re: Yep

All right, all right. Relax guys. It's in the story.

C.

2
0

Are you saying that SPDY was in Opera before it was in Google's own web browser, Chrome?

As for "not allowing" Google to be involved in developing Internet standards - why on earth not? It's a big stakeholder with diverse content delivery needs (search, ads, video) and it has expert programmers and system analysts and designers on payroll, and anyway the standards body isn't going to approve some old rubbish just because Google puts it forward.

I only dread the SPDY-specific malware that is surely coming. If a server can send you files that you didn't request, that's just asking for an exploit to be invented.

2
0

...oh.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPDY : "In September 2012, security researchers claimed to have found a vulnerability in SPDY allowing an attacker to hijack an encrypted SSL session." Remedy: don't use SPDY??

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: ...oh.

That's the CRIME attack, and while SPDY is vunerable it's not only SPDY that is affected:

http://arstechnica.com/security/2012/09/many-ways-to-break-ssl-with-crime-attacks-experts-warn/

0
0

Yeah.

But apparently SPDY is - still? - vulnerable.

I wonder if it's worth trying to use up the supply of cool names for Interent threats, such as putting a telephone return-call protocol on Windows 8 phones and calling it "NEMESIS". Then hackers will be faced with calling their cool new hacking technique something like "PIMPLE" or "BUTTHOLE" or "TWINKIE". And when they announce at hacker conference that that's what they're going to talk about, no one will come.

1
0
Silver badge

So back to the nitty gritty

how will google's ability to 'push' files at me affect my ability to block links I don't want with hosts file/squid?

TIA

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.

Forums