Re: Design Issue: Separate HEADERS and PRIORITY Frames, Eliminate HEADERS+PRIORITY from Jeff Pinner on 2013-05-28 (ietf-http-wg@w3.org from April to June 2013)

From: Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2013 11:12:19 -0700
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Cc: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, ChanWilliam(陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org>, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CA+pLO_iYO-12DaBfAqHJPzBR0hG3Qf7C+vFkRL3m+g7EHKtJfA@mail.gmail.com>

At the time Roberto made the argument that the number of flags (8) was more
sparse than the number of frame types (256), but IIRC this was based on the
flags applying to all Control frames. At this point we have (at least
implicitly) decided that flags are frame-type specific (see PONG flag), so
I don't believe the argument is valid any more.

On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Martin Thomson
<martin.thomson@gmail.com>wrote:

> I remember having almost this exact discussion in Tokyo.  The only
> point that didn't come up this time was an argument Roberto made,
> namely: "A frame type is cheaper (fewer bits) than a flag."
>

Received on Tuesday, 28 May 2013 18:12:50 UTC