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

Re: Call for Consensus: #578

From: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 16:27:01 +1100
Message-ID: <CAH_y2NE=ujQ928Om4x0hWVF8me_Y37QPjiJdL3xg++6gL0A6Hw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
My preferred option is 4!  which is the status quo for encoding but with a
trimmed static table of approx 32 entries, mostly with values (to give
space for dynamic headers).

Almost as good is option 3 - but it needs to be considered together with a
refined static table.

I can live with 1, but I agree with Willy that it is clear we missed a
revision of the static table.

Can't live with 2 because it removes the possibility of pre-generation in
many cases.


cheers



On 22 October 2014 16:03, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:

> <https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/578>
>
> We've straw polled the before, but after further discussion we have
> another proposal for this issue.
>
> The proposals for this issue are now:
>
> 1) Close with no change (status quo).
>
> 2) Jeff's proposal: <
> https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/578#issuecomment-58030551>
>
> 3) Willy's proposal: <http://www.w3.org/mid/20141020165353.GA25743@1wt.eu>
>
> Please state which you support (multiples are fine), as well as what you
> can't live with (and, briefly, why).
>
>
> A word about how I'll judge consensus -- as we are post-WGLC, we are only
> entertaining changes that fall into one of four categories:
>
> a) editorial improvements
> b) substantial interop problems
> c) serious security issues
> d) changes that have broad consensus (i.e., we all agree it's worth it)
>
> Our AD has said that it's entirely appropriate to raise the bar in this
> manner as we get closer to delivery.
>
> As such, proposal #2 and #3 above can only fall under (d). What I'm
> looking for here, then, is for *strong* support (as in, very few if any
> detractors) for either (2) or (3); if making these changes is
> controversial, we haven't met the bar for (d) and so #1 wins the day.
>
> When we straw polled this before, many people said that they didn't want
> to see any change; what I'm specifically looking for is whether they've
> changed their minds.
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
>
>
>


-- 
Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>  @  Webtide - *an Intalio subsidiary*
http://eclipse.org/jetty HTTP, SPDY, Websocket server and client that scales
http://www.webtide.com  advice and support for jetty and cometd.
Received on Wednesday, 22 October 2014 05:27:30 UTC

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