W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2015

Re: Spencer Dawkins' Discuss on draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-16: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 10:19:25 -0500
Message-ID: <CALaySJKXwdXO=EQST2DzeHkx1nNmmQDJm8NCegoT-pJuGVsYzg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: Spencer Dawkins <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, draft-ietf-httpbis-http2.all@tools.ietf.org
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 3:21 AM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> Hi Spencer,
>
>> On 22 Jan 2015, at 6:07 pm, Spencer Dawkins <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I'm confused between these two statements:
>>
>>   1.  Flow control is specific to a connection; i.e., it is "hop-by-
>>       hop", not "end-to-end".
>>
>> and
>>
>>   Both types of flow control are hop-by-hop; that is, only between the
>>   two endpoints.
>>
>> Could you help me get unconfused?
>
> In HTTP, "hop by hop" means the immediate HTTP connection, whereas
> "end to end" means the path between the user agent (the ultimate
> client) and the origin server (the ultimate server), potentially
> taking in any number of intermediaries on the way.
>
> It might clarify a bit to change the end of the latter one to "...
> between the client and server of a single connection."

Spencer's confusion is with the word "endpoints" in the second quote,
and I don't think this change fixes that, as "client and server" can
also be misconstrued (and even with the "of a single connection"
there, they might be).

Why not try to stay with the same terminology?:  "Both types of flow
control are between the endpoints of a single hop, and not over the
entire end-to-end path."

Barry
Received on Thursday, 22 January 2015 15:19:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:42 UTC