Re: Question about HTTP 2.0 priority

• From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
• Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 11:20:35 -0700
• To: Chad Austin <caustin@gmail.com>
• Cc: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <CABkgnnVrswo0HxsiJAzMGqhhAKvBDRFtw2YOLTk+0w+qDrOebw@mail.gmail.com>

On 6 October 2014 10:39, Chad Austin <caustin@gmail.com> wrote:
> If it's truly the case that PRIORITY is O(depth(parent) - depth(stream)),
> does that leave an implementation of HTTP 2's priority graph open to denial
> of service?

That depends on what trade-offs you want to make.

If you really do have a tree that is 10k entries deep, then walking
what is effectively a linked list is going to cost a non-trivial
amount of time.  But you don't have to maintain a linked list.  As you
note, a small increase in complexity and storage allows for certain
kinds of reprioritization.

But if you are talking about attack modes, then I'd consider just
dropping any prioritization that doesn't work out for you.

Received on Monday, 6 October 2014 18:21:02 UTC