Re: 3.3.1 Frame Header: Purpose of 1-bit reserved field?

This is for prioritization experimentation in the future. The bit allows
for priority level vs resource ordering without bloating the payload of a
reprint frame.
It was originally for control vs data.

-=R
On Apr 12, 2013 11:50 PM, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:

> Looking at the minutes from Tokyo, this was originally for control vs.
> data (as in SPDY).
>
> I think there's been some discussion about discarding the control bit;
> OTOH, if people are going to define extension frames, it'd be nice for
> intermediaries to know whether they count against flow control without
> having to understand their semantics...
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> On 13/04/2013, at 3:43 PM, Adrien W. de Croy <adrien@qbik.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > future proofing?  E.g. if we need to move to another format or size for
> stream ID?
> >
> >
> > ------ Original Message ------
> > From: "Brian Raymor (MS OPEN TECH)" <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com>
> > To: "'ietf-http-wg@w3.org'" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
> > Sent: 13/04/2013 12:48:46 p.m.
> > Subject: 3.3.1 Frame Header: Purpose of 1-bit reserved field?
> >> 3.3.1. Frame Header
> >>
> >>  |R| Stream Identifier (31) |
> >>
> >>
> >>   R: A reserved 1-bit field. The semantics of this bit are not defined.
> >>
> >> I was curious about the purpose for the 1-bit reserved field. Can it be
> deleted and the Stream Identifier increased to 32 bits?
> >>
> >> https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/67
> >>
> >>
> >> Brian Raymor
> >> Senior Program Manager
> >> Microsoft Open Technologies, Inc.
> >> A subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
>
>
>
>
>