W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2013

question on non header block data of chained HEADERS and PP

From: Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 14:14:10 -0400
Message-ID: <CAOdDvNocFbwFp35A3Eqf9R5jzm02BEErtz0Z9ZN45M_OT+o7wA@mail.gmail.com>
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
HEADERS and PUSH PROMISE can have their header block fragmented among
multiple contiguous frames. That's clear.

For PP I'm a ltitle unusure how Promised-Stream-ID fits into those
fragments. Is it present in all of them? the frame diagram seems to assert
that it is present in every PP frame, but the definition of
END_PUSH_PROMISE says "the payload of all PUSH_PROMISE frames are
concatenated and interpreted as a single block". and the Promised-Stream-ID
is definitely part of the definition of payload (which we have defined as
everything after the first 8 bytes of frame header).

The right thing is probably that it is present in all of them, but is not
considered part of the payload for purposes of determining the header
block. A clarification seems needed. If that's right, do we need a rule
saying the Promised-Stream-ID must be the same across all the fragments?

I think HEADERS has a similar problem with Priority.. it uses a "payload"
definition of the headers block that would include priority (but
shouldn't)...

-Patrick
Received on Friday, 26 July 2013 18:14:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:14 UTC