- From: 陈智昌 <willchan@chromium.org>
- Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 16:41:06 -0300
- To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 7 May 2013 19:41:34 UTC
I need to re-read the framing continuation thread ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2013JanMar/0600.html), but I thought all this was addressed by that (8192 max frames, with frame continuation bit). I see that the spec does not mention frame continuations, so maybe we just have to write the text, or perhaps the thread reached a different conclusion than I remember. On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 12:19 PM, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote: > 1. There is an existing ed note in the draft indicating that we > currently do not have any way of specifying the maximum frame size. > There are several possibilities: > > a. We decide we don't need to report a maximum frame size. > b. We introduce a MAX_FRAME_SIZE setting for the SETTINGS frame. > c. We add a headers block to the RST_FRAME and GOAWAY frames ;-) .. > > I think I prefer option (a) but (b) works too. > > 2. In the current draft we say that all implementations MUST be > capable of supporting frames up to 8192 octets in length. We don't > say, however, whether that size includes the 8-byte header or is that > just payload octets? > > - James > >
Received on Tuesday, 7 May 2013 19:41:34 UTC