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

Questions and comments on CH

From: Göran Eriksson AP <goran.ap.eriksson@ericsson.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 22:24:57 +0000
To: HTTPWG <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, "ilya@igvita.com" <ilya@igvita.com>
Message-ID: <D31B7947.233D3%goran.ap.eriksson@ericsson.com>

A few minor questions and comments that came to my mind when reading

1. Downlink hint relation to Netinfo

I assume the Downlink information will change similarly to how the NetInfo
API fires event on “network” change?

Also, how will the UA handle handovers by the RAN (Radio Access network)
between micro and macro when in some situations, a macro cell can be of
one technology (say 4G) and the micro cell another (let’s assume 5G with
>>1Gbps) and may “handover” between these cells on a quite short time

Assuming this is exposed in the modem API of a mobile handset and
available to the browser UA for implementing CH Downlink, would every such
“handover” be reflected in the Downlink hint?

The CH draft refers to the “Network Info API” which states:

"Where possible, this value may be refined to report a more accurate
upper bound based on current properties of the interface - e.g. signal
strength, modulation algorithm, and other "network weather" variables.”

This can mean several things including the client/UA measuring,
calculating, prediction, getting network feedback and updating this
“network info” very often since the “RAN weather” can change often indeed?

Is this applicable to the CH Downlink? Or will CH Downlink “only” reflect
the theoretical downlink capacity of the network (technology) it is
connected to?

2. Security considerations

If HTTP/2 clear text is used (horrible thought) I guess an intermediate
could mess with the headers, e.g. triggering a degradation of user

Many regards

Received on Friday, 25 March 2016 22:25:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 25 March 2016 22:25:32 UTC