- From: ??? <willchan@chromium.org>
- Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 20:06:01 -0800
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
I think that's definitely the pragmatic path forward. I apologize for being late to reply to Osama's proposal earlier, although I don't know if it would have made a difference timeline wise. On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 7:14 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > We discussed priority levelling <https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/270> in Zurich, and decided there to take Roberto's "Weighted Dependency Tree" approach. > > However, discussion on the list since has moved on to other proposals, especially Osama's: <http://www.w3.org/mid/f2d284792b50431685dc551141945bec@SN2PR03MB046.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> > > It's not clear to me that we have consensus on one approach here yet. > > We also said that we'd put out another Implementation Draft before London, but with the date fast approaching, we need to either choose one quickly or defer the Implementation Draft. > > Unless we converge in the next day or so, I think Martin should ship a draft -10 with the "vanilla" priority field as before, and we can discuss this issue in more depth in London (presumably shipping an implementation draft shortly thereafter). > > Thoughts? > > Cheers, > > > -- > Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ > > > >
Received on Thursday, 13 February 2014 04:06:29 UTC