Re: Encouraging a healthy HTTP/2 ecosystem

On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 02:29:25PM -0700, William Chan (?????????) wrote:
> Hard fail. User visible error. End users blame the last mover, therefore we
> should move first *if we believe that the functionality is important to
> preserve*. In my example about extensions, assuming we think extensibility
> should be preserved (I've not heard recent disagreement here, but if I'm
> wrong that there's not consensus here, please raise), then we should hard
> fail when the extension negotiation fails. Hence attempting to negotiate
> dummy extensions and use dummy extension frames to see if they make it
> through.

The problem is that there's no "dummy" extension, the extension you'll
try to negociate will be assigned later and you may end up accidentely
negociating something that modifies the framing or anything just because
at the time you do this you're not aware of this. Imagine that we implement
jumbo frames this way. I'd rather not see the TCP Window Scaling mess again
where many firewalls didn't look at the option but still used to analyze
sequence numbers and to block traffic when they looked out of window!

It's important for interoperability not to send undefined crap over a wire
because what's underfined for the agent doing it may be defined for the
one receiving it.


Received on Tuesday, 1 July 2014 22:02:11 UTC