W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2014

Re: Question about HTTP 2.0 priority

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 11:41:50 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnWbwOPDCqZAdmJMKCvakj4m5jkDFe-prGX=weTnRcQsFQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Chad Austin <caustin@gmail.com>
Cc: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 9 October 2014 11:05, Chad Austin <caustin@gmail.com> wrote:
> 1. the server will keep the priority tree information for closed streams
> "long enough"
> 2. In the case of "(A1, A2, A3) -> 0; (B1, B2, B3) -> A1", if A1 completes
> before A2, the server will apply any available resources to A2 and A3 before
> any of B1, B2, or B3.
>
> Sounds like you're saying #1 is likely.

Yep.

> Can you confirm that #2 is also the behavior specified by the current draft?

Not as specified.  This would allocate any resources that might have
been allocated to A1 to its descendants.  We can't express a
dependency on multiple resources, except by creating a linear chain:
B2 -> B1 -> A2 -> A1 -> 0.
Received on Thursday, 9 October 2014 18:42:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:40 UTC