Re: HTTP/2.0 -04 candidate from Martin Thomson on 2013-07-03 (ietf-http-wg@w3.org from July to September 2013)

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 10:42:39 -0700
To: Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CABkgnnWAp72LRyGtAH-AFjTeu3uJYdSovfzRBVptKcrL_AzAQw@mail.gmail.com>

On 2 July 2013 08:42, Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com> wrote:
> From http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-unicorn-httpbis-http2-00#section-6.6:
>    The state of promised streams is bound to the state of the original
>    associated stream on which the PUSH_PROMISE frame were sent.  If the
>    originating stream state changes to fully closed, all associated
>    promised streams fully close as well. [[anchor10: Ed.  Note: We need
>    clarification on this point.  How synchronized are the lifecycles of
>    streams and associated promised streams?]]
>
> I thought previous on-list discussion had agreed to remove this tie between stream lifecycles and just send a stack of RST_STREAMs in a single packet if need be.  Is that still the consensus?

This is removed from the new version of the draft.

Received on Wednesday, 3 July 2013 17:48:31 UTC