- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2014 23:09:49 +0000
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- cc: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
In message <CABkgnnXvvHRBCH3F3xV=dE2y5ZY7JJRPf+qgwwjk9YS+8eCONw@mail.gmail.com>, Martin Thomson w rites: >On 7 July 2014 15:57, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote: >> What if you only want to pamper that one video-stream or conversely, >> only want to handicap that background upload ? > >Flow control perhaps? Using the per-stream window to restrict frame size costs you one RTT per frame. It would certainly work for penalizing a stream but not for pampering one with more throughput. >> I think per-stream settings are missing in the current draft > >Whether you agree or not, that is entirely intentional. Intentional is neither a synomym for smart nor correct :-) -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Monday, 7 July 2014 23:10:13 UTC