- From: Ilari Liusvaara <ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 15:54:17 +0300
- To: Cory Benfield <cory@lukasa.co.uk>
- Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 01:48:13PM +0100, Cory Benfield wrote: > > On 20 Jul 2015, at 17:41, Ilari Liusvaara <ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi> wrote: > > Thanks for the feedback Ilari! It’s much appreciated > > > 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. > > That’s not the reason. The reason the server would emit SETTINGS_PEER_TO_PEER > is to indicate that it’s willing to accept PUSH_PROMISE frames sent from the > client. Note that this spec forbids the client from pushing streams without > that setting being sent by the server. Can't server just set SETTINGS_PUSH_PROMISE to 1 after obtaining SETTINGS_PEER_TO_PEER 1 from client? And SETTINGS_PEER_TO_PEER 1 from client would mean that the server MAY do that? -Ilari
Received on Tuesday, 21 July 2015 12:54:44 UTC