Twitter adds SPDY support to Netty

#1

Post by cgbystrom » Tue, Feb 07, 2012, 4:23 PM UTC

Twitter adds SPDY support to Netty
netty.io

Re: Twitter adds SPDY support to Netty

#2

Post by tlrobinson » Tue, Feb 07, 2012, 5:30 PM UTC

Cool, support seems to be picking up. Here's a list of implementations: http://dev.chromium.org/spdy

Nginx seems to be the big missing one. I think Mongrel2 would be a good fit too.

Re: Twitter adds SPDY support to Netty

#3

Post by spullara » Tue, Feb 07, 2012, 5:34 PM UTC

This is a big deal for sites that want to rival Google sites performance-wise. Especially now that it will be in Firefox 11 in addition to Chrome. It would be great if any of the popular proxy servers - like Nginx - also had support for it.

Re: Twitter adds SPDY support to Netty

#4

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Feb 07, 2012, 5:43 PM UTC

[deleted]

Re: Twitter adds SPDY support to Netty

#5

Post by ComputerGuru » Tue, Feb 07, 2012, 5:48 PM UTC

[deleted] wrote: post #4

[deleted]

I believe Firefox + Chrome easily qualifies as "wide browser support." IE is really the only one left now.

Re: Twitter adds SPDY support to Netty

#6

Post by chc » Tue, Feb 07, 2012, 5:49 PM UTC

[deleted] wrote: post #4

[deleted]

Surely you just need your webserver to support the protocol. I don't think most apps will directly speak SPDY.

Re: Twitter adds SPDY support to Netty

#7

Post by JoshTriplett » Tue, Feb 07, 2012, 5:50 PM UTC

[deleted] wrote: post #4

[deleted]

> Personally, I would hesitate to implement them unless they had wide browser support.

When "implement them" means either "change one config option in your web server" or "install one package containing a SPDY implementation for your server", it seems worth doing just to provide a better experience for the browsers that support it so far.

Re: Twitter adds SPDY support to Netty

#8

Post by tpatke » Tue, Feb 07, 2012, 5:53 PM UTC

JoshTriplett wrote: post #7

[deleted] wrote: post #4

[deleted]

> Personally, I would hesitate to implement them unless they had wide browser support. When "implement them" means either "change one config option in your web server" or "install one package containing a SPDY implementation for your server", it seems worth doing just to provide a better experience for the browsers that support it so far.

You got me there. That does seem reasonable. I guess I need to do a bit more investigation. :-)

Re: Twitter adds SPDY support to Netty

#9

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Feb 07, 2012, 5:53 PM UTC

JoshTriplett wrote: post #7

[deleted] wrote: post #4

[deleted]

> Personally, I would hesitate to implement them unless they had wide browser support. When "implement them" means either "change one config option in your web server" or "install one package containing a SPDY implementation for your server", it seems worth doing just to provide a better experience for the browsers that support it so far.

[deleted]

Re: Twitter adds SPDY support to Netty

#10

Post by firemanx » Tue, Feb 07, 2012, 5:56 PM UTC

spullara wrote: post #3

This is a big deal for sites that want to rival Google sites performance-wise. Especially now that it will be in Firefox 11 in addition to Chrome. It would be great if any of the popular proxy servers - like Nginx - also had support for it.

Last I heard, it was in the works for NGinx:

https://twitter.com/#!/nginxorg/status/150112670966747137