Re: #539: Priority from server to client

• From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
• Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 10:30:52 -0700
• To: RUELLAN Herve <Herve.Ruellan@crf.canon.fr>
• Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Johnny Graettinger <jgraettinger@chromium.org>
• Message-ID: <CABkgnnUJMDBGuTDN6UgG7oJkZMX6ORG_Rxb0vA+bhE7JjTr9-Q@mail.gmail.com>

On 15 July 2014 09:41, RUELLAN Herve <Herve.Ruellan@crf.canon.fr> wrote:
> 1. We use option (2) for the meaning of a PRIORITY frame sent from the server to the client.
> 2. We allow the server to express its priority intentions concerning pushed streams. We could add new optional priority fields to the PUSH_PROMISE frame, that would convey the server intent.

For a server that is declaring its priority, why can't it just apply
the prioritization it deems best until the client says otherwise?  Is
there some advantage to the server being able to diverge from the
default, but have the client know about the specifics of the
divergence?

Received on Tuesday, 15 July 2014 17:31:19 UTC