Re: Some HTTP 2.0 questions

I think they should use strict prioritization. If it's long-lived
prioritization, the client is free to update the advisory priority with a
new PRIORITY frame. Moreover, in the prioritization proposal I emailed out
before and converted into an I-D, it's possible to reprioritize to assign
weighting instead of dependencies. If you truly want weighting, use a

On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Martin Thomson <>wrote:

> On 4 December 2013 13:23, Adrien de Croy <> wrote:
>> Surely in practise there will need to be some processing of pending
>> lower-priority streams whilst there is still higher priority traffic
>> pending.  So the prioritisation would be more like a weighting than a
>> strict prioritisation.
> Yes, that would be how I'd interpret that.  We should probably even *say*
> that, so that we don't generate situations where clients are reluctant to
> prioritize certain types of resources in certain ways lest they generate a
> starvation situation for themselves.

Received on Wednesday, 4 December 2013 23:25:13 UTC