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

Re: Design Issue: PUSH_PROMISE and Stream Priority

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 16:48:41 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnUBEvDtNQM8G5vyfyqRz4tQ8su9+14gMTdaXhzY2cq+Kg@mail.gmail.com>
To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Good point.  The hope was that a reprioritization frame would be
proposed (Will, Roberto, we're all still waiting).

If that's enough, then adding a default (maybe 2^30) would fix this.

On 25 April 2013 11:03, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:
> https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/75
>
> The current draft (-02) says, "The endpoint establishing a new stream
> can assign a priority for the stream."
>
> However, the spec does not define how a stream established using
> PUSH_PROMISE can assign the priority for a stream, nor does the spec
> discuss whether the notion of stream priority applies to push streams.
>
> The spec currently states that PUSH_PROMISE is followed later on by a
> HEADERS frame.
>
> If priority applies to push streams, then we need to add that priority
> can be assigned by allowing the use of a HEADERS+PRIORITY frame.
> Otherwise, we need to clarify the spec text to say that push streams
> have no priority.
>
Received on Thursday, 25 April 2013 23:49:08 UTC

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