- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 11:14:30 +1000
- To: Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com>
- Cc: Tom Bergan <tombergan@chromium.org>, Stefan Eissing <stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 15 August 2016 at 07:15, Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com> wrote: > OTOH let me note that a server can also send priority information as > part of a PUSH_PROMISE frame. This way, the priority tree does not get > ruined. I don't think that makes sense. If the client processes the PUSH_PROMISE and immediately reprioritizes the push, then the PRIORITY frame that appears afterwards will be exactly as meaningless or destructive as anything else. > Ideally, I think clients should send PRIORITY frames when it finds out > how the content of a pushed stream is used, so that a server (that > consider clients to have better understanding of how the resources > should be prioritized) can respect the updated tree to prioritize the > pushed streams. This is good advice. >>> We are aware of a few servers that update the priority tree like >>> this, e.g., see Apache's h2_session_set_prio. >> >> Stefan, is this right? See above. > > In case of H2O, we prioritize pushes of certain media types, but that > is done out of the HTTP/2 prioritization tree. I think that is the way > to go. I couldn't parse this. Do you mean that you ignore the client's express priorities, or work within the client's priorities?
Received on Monday, 15 August 2016 01:14:59 UTC