- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 17:10:18 +0200
- To: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
- CC: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 2013-07-31 16:46, Amos Jeffries wrote: > On 31/07/2013 9:34 p.m., Julian Reschke wrote: >> Questions: >> > <snip> >> >> 5.2.2 >> >> "Deployments with constrained resources (for example, memory) MAY >> employ flow control to limit the amount of memory a peer can consume. >> Note, however, that this can lead to suboptimal use of available >> network resources if flow control is enabled without knowledge of the >> bandwidth-delay product (see [RFC1323])." >> >> s/MAY/can/ >> > > I took this as being intentionally normative language. One participant > MAY use the feature therefore all participante MUST implement support > just in case it happens. With "can" there is no normative requirement on > the other participants to implement anything regarding flow control, > which would lead to harm for the participant needing it. If *that* is the concern it really needs to be addressed more clearly. (I had the impression that flow control support clearly is not optional). Best regards, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 31 July 2013 15:10:51 UTC