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

Re: initial stream id from a client

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 19:32:43 +0100
Message-ID: <CABkgnnXJY175am=OKbrDRS=EuS35+yP_1huj0K-t3Cxu7Nc7eA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com>
Cc: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>, Shigeki Ohtsu <ohtsu@iij.ad.jp>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 13 August 2013 18:58, Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com> wrote:
> The upgrade case is the outlier and already has lots of special case logic.

I suspected that this would be the reason :)

> If the upgrade is successful than the session handling will have to manage a
> stream-ID of 1. It doesn't make sense to couple the session handling with
> the wire format.

I'll note that the last sentence could be construed as an argument for
starting from 3 always.  I think that you instead want to say that you
don't want to be affected by something you don't plan to implement.
Received on Tuesday, 13 August 2013 18:33:10 UTC

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