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: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 11:35:21 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnVoc_s+x2Qu5HZz+OwkQaHhnNM57iYCLVH-QQO+g7vH7A@mail.gmail.com>
To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Cc: RUELLAN Herve <Herve.Ruellan@crf.canon.fr>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 26 April 2013 09:27, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:
> For this there are several possible solutions:
>
>     A. We can simply say PUSH_PROMISE streams have no priority.
>     B. We can say that PUSH_PROMISE streams inherit the priority of
> their parent, client-initiated stream
>     C. We can allow the server to use HEADERS+PRIORITY or a new
> Reprioritization Frame to establish the priority of a pushed stream.

That seems like a fair taxonomy.

A is not possible.  There is no such thing as no priority.  Default
priority, perhaps.  At the point that you have to contend with
choosing between two streams, then you have prioritization.
Received on Friday, 26 April 2013 18:35:49 UTC

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