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

Re: Stateless Multiplexable Continuations #541

From: Jason Greene <jason.greene@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 21:41:43 -0500
Cc: mnot@mnot.net, phk@phk.freebsd.dk, squid3@treenet.co.nz, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <3837DA27-C51A-4FE6-B5BF-8B7D23CE7454@redhat.com>
To: K.Morgan@iaea.org

On Jun 26, 2014, at 5:31 PM, K.Morgan@iaea.org wrote:

> On 26 June 2014 19:40, jason.greene@redhat.com wrote:
>> On Jun 18, 2014, at 11:49 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
>>> One thing that came up in a side conversation in NYC was the possibility of only HPACKing the HEADERS frame; subsequent CONTINUATION frames would be uncompressed (so they don't affect state, and could be flow controlled).
>> Since it seems likely that the jumbo frames are going to be sidelined to an extension,
>> I really think this proposal needs a second look. It has a lot of really nice benefits including:
>> 1. Discouraging CONTINUATIONS (slightly harder to create and they take more space)
> Why would you still need CONTINUATION frames?  Can't you just use regular HEADERS frames without compression?

Mainly to allow them to be flow controlled, since thats based on frame type.

Jason T. Greene
WildFly Lead / JBoss EAP Platform Architect
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
Received on Friday, 27 June 2014 02:45:31 UTC

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