Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google, Microsoft Cheat On Slow-Start — Should You?

Posted by Soulskill on from the reply-hazy-ask-again dept.

kdawson writes "Software developer and blogger Ben Strong did a little exploring to find out how Google achieves its admirably fast load times. What he discovered is that Google, and to a much greater extent Microsoft, are cheating on the 'slow-start' requirement of RFC-3390. His research indicates that discussion of this practice on the Net is at an early, and somewhat theoretical, stage. Strong concludes with this question: 'What should I do in my app (and what should you do in yours)? Join the arms race or sit on the sidelines and let Google have all the page-load glory?'"

4 of 123 comments (clear)

  1. Misread the RFC by Spazmania · · Score: 5, Informative

    RFC 3390 uses the "MUST" terminology exactly one place: when describing behavior after a packet is lost during the syn/synack. It doesn't use the phrase "MUST NOT" anywhere.

    In every other respect slow-start is recommended but optional. Google is in no way breaching the standard by not using it.

    --
    Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
    1. Re:Misread the RFC by H0p313ss · · Score: 4, Informative

      RFC 3390 uses the "MUST" terminology exactly one place: when describing behavior after a packet is lost during the syn/synack. It doesn't use the phrase "MUST NOT" anywhere.

      In every other respect slow-start is recommended but optional. Google is in no way breaching the standard by not using it.

      I just logged in to say exactly the same thing. Not implementing an optional variant is not cheating. Nothing to see, move along.

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    2. Re:Misread the RFC by fluffy99 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not sure why you got modded informative since the original poster and your "me-too" are both wrong . RFC 3390 is an extension to RFC2581. RFC 3390 says you MAY use an IW of up to 4 segments. If you don't use this option, you fall under RFC2581 which says the IW MUST be less than or equal to 2 segments.

      http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3390.txt
      http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2581.txt

  2. Re:This is well known to a small community by egoots · · Score: 5, Informative

    Are you a wizard?

    No, he's John Nagle.