W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2014

Re: Cost analysis: (was: Getting to Consensus: CONTINUATION-related issues)

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 12:17:39 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnXeKqD6Z5Hm95AcCSP3+zY9VL-v4ChOta+GnTXmfw-7og@mail.gmail.com>
To: Michael Sweet <msweet@apple.com>
Cc: Jason Greene <jason.greene@redhat.com>, Nicholas Hurley <hurley@todesschaf.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 18 July 2014 12:10, Michael Sweet <msweet@apple.com> wrote:
> Actually, there is a simple solution to this problem - add a flag causes the header table to be reset/cleared before the frame is processed.  The sender can set the flag when it has tried preparing a HEADERS frame and made one too big, or when it gets a 431 response that indicates the recipient was unable to process it fully.
> That solves the header-table-is-out-of-sync and allows the sender to maintain a single header table should that become too much of a burden (although constrained endpoints can always specify settings to disable the header table on their end and always use encoding that doesn't add values to the header table...)

We do already have that capability.
Received on Friday, 18 July 2014 19:18:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 30 March 2016 09:57:09 UTC