- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2014 08:00:53 +0000
- To: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
- cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
-------- In message <CAH_y2NGasMSx1C3kX66Ucvq=szNA-60tmfM6juhTZD=G-vBXNA@mail.gmail.com> , Greg Wilkins writes: >My current guess is that the server is going to implement it's own >heuristic based priority mechanism that will use very little input from >client supplied priorities, specially not dynamically provided ones. >Hopefully I'm wrong and the current tree/weights will be useful to the >server side, but only experimentation will tell. +1 I'm still of the opinion that no significant loss of performance would happen if the client just sent a single priority bit meaning: '0' The fetch is happening in a background context ie: * outside of scroll-regions viewport * in covered tab * in hidden window * screen-saver is running * from a batch-job '1' The fetch is happening in a foreground context ie: * in view * user is tapping his fingers * from a real-time transaction And I think the entire priority verbiage should be replaced by something like that and any more advanced priority communications/state relegated to extensions. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Thursday, 6 November 2014 08:01:16 UTC