Re: [WARNING: ATTACHMENT(S) MAY CONTAIN MALWARE]Re: HTTP(3) priorities

Hi,

The only thing I could suggest is that you make those priority flags increments of 20,
So that if there are changes or minor priority preference per website, then
That in between numbers can be used. If there is any new future priority conventions
Then just add them in the middle of the 20 group splitting the existing group.
Maybe make the field 2 bytes, which allows for future expansion, were there are many files, streams
Which require a new priority order.

Otherwise one needs to build a priority map, over the deps, converting a high resolution to low resolution.

Kind Regards,

Wesley Oliver

> On 24 Jul 2019, at 19:14, Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> Attached are the slides that Lucas and I presented during the side meeting.
>
> Thank you all for the feedback.
>
> 2019年7月9日(火) 21:00 Ian Swett <ianswett=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>:
>>
>> There has been quite a bit of discussion of HTTP priorities lately on both the QUIC and HTTP mailing lists, with more to follow.  The plan for IETF in Montreal is as follows:
>>
>> Monday: Overview of priorities for 15 minutes in HTTP, with 15 minutes discussion.
>> Wednesday: A side meeting will be held from 8:30-9:45am in Van Horne.
>> Thursday: I'll summarise the side meeting in Wednesday's HTTP session.
>>
>> Thanks, Ian
>
>
>
> --
> Kazuho Oku
> <The Priority Header Field.pdf>

This e-mail is classified C2 - Vodacom Restricted - Information to be used inside Vodacom but it may be shared with authorised partners.

"This e-mail is sent on the Terms and Conditions that can be accessed by Clicking on this linkhttps://www.vodacom.co.za/vodacom/terms/email-acceptable-user-policy"

Received on Thursday, 25 July 2019 06:48:47 UTC