W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2014

Re: Zero weight for 100 CONTINUE, instead of flow control

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 14:18:41 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnWyvc7Men2=YR_vFOuU6iLEd5+F+RA91nzqrKKuYz7Hxg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>
Cc: David Krauss <potswa@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2 April 2014 13:52, Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com> wrote:
> Unless we're, in general, supporting that the server can send PRIORITY frames to the client to suggest how the client prioritize its uploads?  I hope not, but maybe I missed that discussion.

Me too.  And that would be contrary to what is written.  If the server
were to send PRIORITY, it would be to make a request of the client
regarding resource allocation at the client.  Which, for HTTP/2, is
pretty much pointless.

100 Continue is addressed perfectly well by setting the initial stream
flow control window to zero and using WINDOW_UPDATE to open the pipe.
Either requires a round trip, but weight changing has other
(side-)effects.
Received on Wednesday, 2 April 2014 21:19:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:29 UTC