RE: Acknowledging pushed content

An extension could define an informative frame, certainly.  There’s no requirement that the server understand, so the client could send speculatively or define a setting that hints to the client whether it should bother.

From: Phil Lello []
Sent: Friday, April 8, 2016 9:01 AM
To: Martin Thomson <>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <>
Subject: Re: Acknowledging pushed content

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 9:39 PM, Martin Thomson <<>> wrote:
On 7 April 2016 at 17:13, Phil Lello <<>> wrote:
> I'm not aware if this being covered before; has any consideration been given
> to acknowledging pushed content?

Yes, considerable thought has been put into this problem.  You will
one example of that process here:

In other words, the application can do this itself.

That's a good solutuion, but doesn't seem a good fit for this use case since the records aren't events. I omitted to specify HTTP/2 push as opposed to other push mechanisms. I'll explain the scenario further.
In both a traditional desktop browser environment and server-to-server web services, paging is often used when dealing with a set of results. To optimise responsiveness, a server could send page 1 and push page 2. The objective here is to tell the server when page 2 is requested by the client so that it can prepare/push page 3. In a browser environment, this could be implemented with client-side application logic, but DELETE seems like the wrong action. In a server-to-server environment for a public webservice, where there will be multiple client implementation, it seems better to handle this with a 'push-consumed' frame at the HTTP/2 level, so a server can try to keep pipelines full for clients without changing application-level semantics.
Does a separate solution seem appropriate here, or should we aim to converge?

Received on Friday, 8 April 2016 16:33:36 UTC