Re: Concerns about HTTP/2 Priority

SGTM-- moving this from unreliable to reliable behavior seems like a
definite win for intermediaries, and potentially others.
-=R

On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 4:40 PM, Ilya Grigorik <igrigorik@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 8:42 AM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
>
>> What do other people think about the general idea?
>
>
> I like it. I think it moves the discussion from "you could bend the
> protocol to do this assuming you have a cooperating client+server", which
> is not something we can reasonably rely on as a browser, to a plausible
> "PRIORITY is allowed on idle stream, treat such streams as 'group
> anchors'"... i.e. allowing priority on idle stream means servers *must*
> deal with this case, which makes using and deploying such mechanism much
> more plausible.
>
> ig
>