Google badmouths HTTP, proposes SPDY as a speedy successor

[still1]

If there's anything that Google doesn't like, it's things that collect dust. The company is famous for its annual spring cleaning efforts, in which the firm rids itself of redundant and dead-end projects, along with more bullish moves, such as its push to overhaul the internet's DNS system. Now it's looking to replace HTTP with a new protocol known as SPDY, and to that end, it's demonstrating the potential speed gains that one might expect on a mobile network. According to the company's benchmarks, mean page load times on the Galaxy Nexus are 23 percent faster with the new system, and it hypothesizes that further optimizations can be made for 3G and 4G networks. To its credit, Google has already implemented SPDY in Chrome, and the same is true for Firefox and Amazon Silk. Even Microsoft appears to be on-board. As a means to transition, the company proposes an Apache 2.2 module known as mod_spdy, which allows web servers to take advantage of features such as stream multiplexing and header compression. As for HTTP, it's no doubt been a reliable companion, but it seems that it'll need to work a bit harder to earn its keep. Stay weird, Google, the internet wouldn't be the same without you.

http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/02/google-proposes-spdy-replacement/

[Brandon H Supervisor]

interesting

[HawkMan]

It's a food thing we can measure things down to the millisecond so we can pretend this actually makes a difference.

[remixedcat]

a food thing???

[Ambroos]

If you use Google Chrome you have actually been using it for ages. Most Google.com-based sites (Gmail, Search, ...) and Twitter all use SPDY automatically when using HTTPS.

To see when you're on a SPDY-powered site: use https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/mpbpobfflnpcgagjijhmgnchggcjblin

[Rigby]

It doesn't replace HTTP, it works with it. The name makes me cringe though.

[hjf288]

The multiplexing is actually quite nice..

[Brandon H Supervisor]

If you use Google Chrome you have actually been using it for ages. Most Google.com-based sites (Gmail, Search, ...) and Twitter all use SPDY automatically when using HTTPS.

To see when you're on a SPDY-powered site: use https://chrome.googl...jhmgnchggcjblin

it's available for firefox as well https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/spdy-indicator/?src=ss

[still1]

If you use Google Chrome you have actually been using it for ages. Most Google.com-based sites (Gmail, Search, ...) and Twitter all use SPDY automatically when using HTTPS.

To see when you're on a SPDY-powered site: use https://chrome.googl...jhmgnchggcjblin

it's available for firefox as well https://addons.mozil...dicator/?src=ss

Microsoft is implementing SPDY too.. hopefully in IE10

How?

The HTTP Speed+Mobility proposal starts from both the Google SPDY protocol (a separate submission to the IETF for this discussion) and the work the industry has done around WebSockets.

SPDY has done a great job raising awareness of web performance and taking a ?clean slate? approach to improving HTTP to make the Web faster. The main departures from SPDY are to address the needs of mobile devices and applications.

http://blogs.msdn.co...web-faster.aspx

[bogas04]

a food thing???

foolish probably ?

If you use Google Chrome you have actually been using it for ages. Most Google.com-based sites (Gmail, Search, ...) and Twitter all use SPDY automatically when using HTTPS.

To see when you're on a SPDY-powered site: use https://chrome.googl...jhmgnchggcjblin

And its now supported by Firefox(Beta) too ! And to check if site uses SPDY use https://addons.mozil...tor/?src=search (as told above)

[Phouchg]

But of course HTTP is crap. Internets was never meant to be whatever it is now and what it will in an increasing pace continue to be evolved. Sometimes makes me wonder - didn't anybody see that s*it was going overboard really quickly and think "better pull the plug, it's gonna blow".

Good luck on replacing HTTP, and DNS, too, though. Then while they're at it, might as well replace HTML, too. It's all too widespread and fundamental.

[still1]

But of course HTTP is crap. Internets was never meant to be whatever it is now and what it will in an increasing pace continue to be evolved. Sometimes makes me wonder - didn't anybody see that s*it was going overboard really quickly and think "better pull the plug, it's gonna blow".

Good luck on replacing HTTP, and DNS, too, though. Then while they're at it, might as well replace HTML, too. It's all too widespread and fundamental.

SPDY does not replace HTTP; it modifies the way HTTP requests and responses are sent over the wire.^[1] This means that all the existing server-side applications can be used without modification if a SPDY-compatible translation layer is put in place.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPDY

[abecedarian paradoxious]

But of course HTTP is crap. Internets was never meant to be whatever it is now and what it will in an increasing pace continue to be evolved. Sometimes makes me wonder - didn't anybody see that s*it was going overboard really quickly and think "better pull the plug, it's gonna blow".

Good luck on replacing HTTP, and DNS, too, though. Then while they're at it, might as well replace HTML, too. It's all too widespread and fundamental.

What's another proprietary standard?

[Salty Wagyu]

Can be enabled in firefox by toggling network.http.spdy.enabled in about:config

And the SPDY indicator addon: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/spdy-indicator/

[Singh400]

Lemme guess Google owns the rights to SPDY.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

SPDY is basically HTTP with a separate framing protocol, proper multiplexing and always on encryption (And a lot of the old crap removed). They're not replacing HTTP, and in fact SPDY seems to be the basis for HTTP 2.0.

The fact that you have to open a separate connection for each object retrieved didn't seem so bad when HTTP 1.0 was first created, but now when pages have have 100+ objects, that's 100+ connections per page load. Each one of those connections takes memory, each one fills a slot in the client and server, each one has to undergo the TCP connections algorithms (Such as trying to detect optimal bandwidth, etc.) and since there's so many, routers and such can have a hard time trying to prioritise traffic (Some traffic management systems for Linux operate on the connection level, so when you spawn 150 connections at the same time it can't do much to prioritise any of them)

HTTP 1.1 with pipelining solves some issues, but that's got it's own issues as well (proxies often don't support it, or break in funny ways, etc.), and at it's core it's still HTTP 1.0, with the ability to re-use a connection.

[Detection]

Been using it for a while, only works fully with google services atm, bit quicker, nothing wow though

[AltecXP]

Didn't they recently come out saying that SPDY has issues with domains that already use hardware to speed up https?

[123456789A]

SPDY is actually one letter away from SPY, which is what Google wants to do to monetize your browsing experience and harvest more personal information from users.

No thanks, I will continue using HTTP and a browser with a tin foil hat extension.

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

SPDY is actually one letter away from SPY, which is what Google wants to do to monetize your browsing experience and harvest more personal information from users

Tin foil hats, 99c

[Singh400]

Tin foil hats, 99c

Location: Leicester, UK - you mean a quid right? ;)

[still1]

SPDY is actually one letter away from SPY, which is what Google wants to do to monetize your browsing experience and harvest more personal information from users.

No thanks, I will continue using HTTP and a browser with a tin foil hat extension.

stupidest comment ever... SPDY is a protocol... Its like saying i would not use ftp protocol because of so and so....

then be aware that firefox will enable it by default in FF13 and Microsoft is implementing it in IE10 probably.

wonder what browser you will use?

so please also dont use Twitter and any server which uses Apache server for web request...

[Phouchg]

---

Ah, very good. Then Engadget haven't done their homework, article does say replace ("Now it's looking to replace HTTP").

[123456789A]

stupidest comment ever... SPDY is a protocol... Its like saying i would not use ftp protocol because of so and so....

then be aware that firefox will enable it by default in FF13 and Microsoft is implementing it in IE10 probably.

wonder what browser you will use?

so please also dont use Twitter and any server which uses Apache server for web request...

lol I guess you didn't catch the sarcasm part about the tin foil hat.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

Didn't they recently come out saying that SPDY has issues with domains that already use hardware to speed up https?

SPDY requires an extension to the TLS/SSL handshake (NPN - Next Protocol Negotiation), so hardware that does TLS/SSL will ignore that (without an update, if they can be updated), and stop the client using SPDY.

But there's nothing really strange about that, the software side is the same. If you want to use SPDY you still need your stuff to support it, etc.

Edit: People have also said SPDY breaks caching, that's true in the sense that it uses TLS/SSL, and that always has broken caching.