- From: Cory Benfield <cory@lukasa.co.uk>
- Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2015 21:13:18 +0100
- To: Ilari Liusvaara <ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi>
- Cc: Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
> On 8 Jul 2015, at 20:03, Ilari Liusvaara <ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi> wrote: > > "This limits some of the restrictions of RFC 7540 [RFC7540] Section 8." > > s/limits/lifts/ (dunno)? > Great spot, thanks. > > Also, I think that for bidirectional push to work, one also needs lift > the restriction that server can't set push enabled flag (RFC7540, > section 8.2, last paragraph). I think you’re right, but I think this is symptomatic of a broader point, which is that any setting that is dependent on the idea of a ‘client’ or a ‘server’ needs to be rethought. In the case of RFC 7540 I think you’re right that this is only SETTINGS_ENABLE_PUSH, but a note should be made for the case where this extension is combined with others. I’ve applied some draft updates in response to this feedback. Thanks! Cory
Received on Wednesday, 8 July 2015 20:13:48 UTC