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

Re: #38 - HTTP2 min value for server supported max_concurrent_streams

From: Albert Lunde <atlunde@panix.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 05:29:52 -0600
Message-ID: <512C9CB0.2030502@panix.com>
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2/26/2013 2:34 AM, Osama Mazahir wrote:
> 1.Handshake Advertise: Advertise limits as part of 
> handshake/negotiation.  That way, upon session start each side knows the 
> otherĄŻs limit and can guarantee that it wonĄŻt violate it.  That way, we 
> can simplify all parts of the protocol that are dealing with 
> limit-exceed cases.

Would there be any merit to having a limited number of low-resource
profiles which would set several parameters? The chief virtue seems that
they might be specified in fewer bits.

I can't see this as a mechanism that scales up indefinitely unless the
profiles could be monotonically ordered, and the parameters given by
some sort of power or exponential function (this could be hard to tune).

So this idea is mainly an escape hatch for low-end clients or servers.
Received on Tuesday, 26 February 2013 11:30:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 26 February 2013 11:30:18 GMT