W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2013

Re: Design Issue: Max Concurrent Streams Limit and Unidirectional Streams

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 16:18:32 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnXrku1B8ehWWeCCaWBeTfhsWGTagHTKbA3F_HYe0Fux0Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Martin Thomson
> <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Do you mean that only outward bound streams count toward the
>> concurrency limit.  That could be workable; it's certainly easier to
>> explain.

On 25 April 2013 16:13, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, Outward bound only.

This has the biggest impact on servers and intermediaries.  How do
they feel about having clients initiating more requests while the
server is sending responses.

Thinking on this more, it does add an interesting pipelining-like
problem.  If all I'm doing is sending GET requests, then I can
probably open up thousands of streams, but the server can only respond
to a limited subset of those requests, holding requests (or responses)
in waiting until the response logjam frees up.  I think that this is
an undesirable property of the solution.  (MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS
could then look very much like HTTP/1.1 with pipelining.)
Received on Thursday, 25 April 2013 23:18:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:12 UTC