- From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 17:45:06 -0700
- To: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
- Cc: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, Ilari Liusvaara <ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi>, Cory Benfield <cory@lukasa.co.uk>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
+1 to the notion of moving priority out of the http2 doc and into a separate document. On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com> wrote: > > On 3 September 2014 09:43, Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote: >> >> I would really appreciate it if folks would stop hijacking my threads > > > Sorry my bad: anticipating failure again. > > On the substance of this thread, I agree that an optional priority should > not be part of headers frame. We've not yet implemented priorities but are > interested in experimenting with their use. Happy for the detail to be > moved to appendix or other document. > > regards > > -- > Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com> > http://eclipse.org/jetty HTTP, SPDY, Websocket server and client that scales > http://www.webtide.com advice and support for jetty and cometd.
Received on Wednesday, 3 September 2014 00:45:52 UTC