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

Re: moving forward on draft-lear-httpbis-svcinfo-rr

From: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2013 13:06:15 -0800
Message-ID: <CAP+FsNcapugpzHzuCkTmwV3C4fB=K0H3Svdoqwxqt8dNHocn8g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
I don't remember BDP being one of these, though we did have discussion that
talked about BDP in relation to some of the settings.
These were more along the lines of max-concurrent-streams,
max-compressor-state-size, and various other HTTP/2 specific settings that
the client should know about/respect.

-=R


On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 1:04 AM, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> At the interim meeting we discussed this draft in several different
> contexts.  Here is my understanding of what people would like to see,
> going forward:
>
> 1.  Change the InstanceId to be something mnemonic instead of a number,
> so that services can have names.
> 2.  Combine transport protocol and version information into a profile
> 3.  Add a text field that can provide browser hints.
>
> I have no issues with the first two.  There were two examples given for
> the 3rd: browser hints and BDP.  I think we decided that BDP wouldn't
> work well, so do people agree that browser hints are appropriate for
> DNS?  If so, what's a good example?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Eliot
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 5 February 2013 21:06:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 5 February 2013 21:06:45 GMT