W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2016

Re: Recursive HTTP/2 Push

From: Simone Bordet <simone.bordet@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2016 19:12:21 +0100
Message-ID: <CAFWmRJ1cPsd3236mBdnrdOzqBb3yAO5OoAuBvK=j8_L2pZcobw@mail.gmail.com>
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>

On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se> wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Feb 2016, Simone Bordet wrote:
>> Can someone clarify if HTTP/2 really intended to forbid recursive pushes
>> and why ?
> I can't remember the exact reasoning, but it seems clear to me that we
> want(ed) servers only to push resources on streams the client has asked for.
> "Pushed responses are always associated with an explicit request from the
> client" (from 8.2.1)
> But is there a particular reason to insist on sending the push promise on
> stream_id 2 in the second push and not just make it on stream_id 3?

The reason is to respect the shape of the resource tree: recursive.png
depends on recursive.css.
If the client directly asks for recursive.css, then it should get
recursive.png pushed.

Sure we can make the pushed resources just one level deep, or flatten
the resource tree like you suggest, but the recursive solution looked
more "natural".

Thanks !

Simone Bordet
Finally, no matter how good the architecture and design are,
to deliver bug-free software with optimal performance and reliability,
the implementation technique must be flawless.   Victoria Livschitz
Received on Sunday, 7 February 2016 18:12:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 22 March 2016 12:47:11 UTC