
Nginx-1.3.15 development version released, featuring experimental SPDY module - newman314
http://nginx.org/
======
ck2
Oh so you don't have to patch it manually anymore?

Patch was very stable, no problems and spdy just works.

Apparently work on the patch/module was sponsored by Automattic (WordPress,
Matt Mullenweg) so thanks to them and whomever worked on it! Some background
here [https://barry.wordpress.com/2012/06/16/nginx-spdy-and-
automa...](https://barry.wordpress.com/2012/06/16/nginx-spdy-and-automattic/)

ps. REMEMBER you need openssl 1.0.1 - previous versions will not work with
spdy and distributions like CentOS do not come with the newer version. You can
switch to the IUS repo in that case <http://iuscommunity.org/pages/Repos.html>

    
    
         rpm -Uvh http://dl.iuscommunity.org/pub/ius/stable/Redhat/6/x86_64/ius-release-1.0-10.ius.el6.noarch.rpm
         yum install yum-plugin-replace
         yum replace openssl --replace-with openssl10

~~~
muxxa
I tripped up on the NPN module when building openssl from source - great tip
with the yum replacement installation. Note: you also need to have EPEL
installed for the above to work:

    
    
        rpm -Uvh http://ftp.heanet.ie/pub/fedora/epel/6/x86_64/epel-release-6-8.noarch.rpm

~~~
ck2
Ah I may have had epel enabled already, I think Centos6 even comes with the
repo file, you just have to edit to enable it. If not, they run their own
mirror so you don't even need to specify one.

    
    
       rpm -ivh epel-release-6-8.noarch.rpm

------
sp332
A few caveats: "Current implementation of SPDY protocol does not support
“server push”.

Processing of requests from SPDY connections cannot be rate limited."

<http://nginx.org/en/docs/http/ngx_http_spdy_module.html>

~~~
tete
And SPDY doesn't support caching per default. Well, it's hard.

~~~
hobohacker
Can you clarify this statement? Perhaps there's missing context, but as it
reads, it seems like a false statement. When I look at chrome://view-http-
cache/, I see a bunch of <https://> resources for google.com (which are served
over SPDY).

------
buro9
For a moment I thought this was the stable branch.

Note to all: This is a development branch release.

~~~
snaky
"..1.3.x is usable for production anyway (though might break some 3rd party
modules due to API changes introduced from time to time)" -- nginx dev team
lead at
[http://mailman.nginx.org/pipermail/nginx/2013-February/03755...](http://mailman.nginx.org/pipermail/nginx/2013-February/037552.html)

------
josteink
How real is this interest for Google's non-standard anyway?

Is anyone going to switch their production setup to run software in
development merely to support a "internet-protocol" entirely controlled by a
single company known for developing things behind closed doors?

SPDY on the open internet makes no fucking sense.

This is Microsoft and MSIE all over again, but people are evidently too
blinded by Google-fandom to realize it.

~~~
kyrra
The HTTP 2.0 draft is using SPDY as a starting point for "asynchronous
connection multiplexing, header compression, and request-response pipelining,
while maintaining full backwards compatibility with the transaction semantics
of HTTP 1.1"

So while Google may have come up with SPDY, we may get it as part of HTTP 2.0,
from a standards organization. So it's not totally in Google's hands. It's
being used as a starting point for a standard.

<http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpbis-http2/>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_2.0>

~~~
maratd
> we may get it

Which I think is the key statement here. This is all fantastic work, from both
Google and those working on the draft, but this is _years_ from being
standardized properly and _years_ more before it's ubiquitous on all browsers.

Also, while its performance is very impressive when comparing against vanilla
HTTPS, I haven't seen any impressive numbers of it vs vanilla HTTP?

~~~
coldtea
> _This is all fantastic work, from both Google and those working on the
> draft, but this is years from being standardized properly and years more
> before it's ubiquitous on all browsers._

Just like CSS3 and HTML5. But you can start using it now, all the same, and
many people do, all the same.

> _Also, while its performance is very impressive when comparing against
> vanilla HTTPS, I haven't seen any impressive numbers of it vs vanilla HTTP?_

It's not supposed to be used with HTTP. And the web of the future is not
supposed to have much HTTP without S, either.

------
velodrome
Are there any ecommerce sites using SPDY?

~~~
IgorPartola
Google Wallet: <https://www.google.com/wallet/>

    
    
      window.chrome.loadTimes().wasFetchedViaSpdy

