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

Re: Stuck in a train -- reading HTTP/2 draft.

From: Jason Greene <jason.greene@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 15:02:56 -0500
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <2880E696-6AD0-4626-B387-2980FD060E12@redhat.com>
To: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>

On Jun 24, 2014, at 3:01 AM, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz> wrote:

> On 24/06/2014 7:14 p.m., David Krauss wrote:
>> On 2014–06–24, at 3:08 PM, David Krauss <potswa@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Also, stream initiation order is not preserved by intermediaries, so TCP’s guarantee is not strong enough.
>> Oops, that’s too pathological to be possible. Still, PRIORITY has a purpose, although it might need a trial period as an extension.
> More accurately middleware can potentially be load balancing a given set
> of streams over N backend servers. Any one of which at low-priority may
> respond faster than a "high" priority server. Leading to sub-optimal
> response frame ordering on the client connection regardless of request
> sent order.

Thats a good point. My mental model was focusing on execution ordering. I can see a benefit when you have data ready to ship on the response side, and ordering the frames in a particular way is helpful to the client.
Jason T. Greene
WildFly Lead / JBoss EAP Platform Architect
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
Received on Wednesday, 25 June 2014 20:06:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:31 UTC