Skip to content

Comment on How Facebook can avoid losing revenue when they switch to always-on SSLparent

Comments

>SSL doesn't introduce scroll latency

It introduces request latency, which could certainly add latency to Facebook's infinite scrolling.

Which would be a problem if you couldn't trigger infinite scroll before the bottom of the page is reached.

Facebook is largely push driven, so one cleverly placed SSL gif in an email, or simply opening a connection when receiving a push notification would largely eliminate even these issues.

I'm dealing with similar issues right now with some of my projects and once you start thinking you can eliminate a lot of SSL latency, for example in the apps you can make a connection to the webserver immediately on app start up to ensure DNS, SSL, etc latency is already taken care of, it's funny but the app is probably faster because the predominant view that 'SSL is slow' causes those who advocate for it to go the extra mile to ensure any latency is effectively hidden.

Login has to occur over SSL anyway there's virtually no difference between SSL and non-SSL as the vast majority of latency is caused by the first connection, when you really get down to it and implement proper latency hiding techniques there's virtually no difference between SSL and non-SSL, and especially not for high traffic frequently visited sites with touch points across the web.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.