- From: Ilari Liusvaara <ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi>
- Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 19:41:11 +0300
- To: Cory Benfield <cory@lukasa.co.uk>
- Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 04:51:21PM +0100, Cory Benfield wrote: > For those who are interested, I’ve submitted an initial draft for > the HTTP/2 P2P extension to the IETF data tracker: you can find > information about that draft below. > > > > Name: draft-benfield-http2-p2p > > Revision: 00 The seemingly only reason server-side SETTINGS_PEER_TO_PEER is if client wants to wait for acknowledge of server support before sending its CLIENT_AUTHORITY frames. But omitting that wait would just cause the CLIENT_AUTHORITY frames to be harmlessly ignored. What are the semantics if client sends multiple CLIENT_AUTHRORITY frames? The document seems to assume authorities are always global, not either global or of restricted scope (including link-local). But usage of authorities of restricted scope has its own issues. The descriptions of PUSH_PROMISE behavior look bit convoluted. One seems to say that (given certain conditions) server MAY set SETTINGS_PUSH_PROMISE to 1. The other seems to say that to push, one must have per-stream server role on associated stream. -Ilari
Received on Monday, 20 July 2015 16:41:36 UTC