- From: Benedikt Christoph Wolters <benedikt.wolters@rwth-aachen.de>
- Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 12:32:20 +0100
- To: Cory Benfield <cory@lukasa.co.uk>
- CC: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com>, <fenix@google.com>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, <ben@nostrum.com>, <alissa@cooperw.in>, <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>, Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net>, <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
2016-11-30 9:41 GMT+01:00 Cory Benfield <cory@lukasa.co.uk>: > What happens if both stream A and B are blocked? Should my server endeavour to serve dependent streams in that case? I *think* the answer is yes because of the logic around having grouping nodes formed from idle streams, but I’m not 100% sure and would like clarification. Section 5.3.4 Prioritization State Management states: > Resources are shared between streams with the same parent stream, which means that if a stream in that set closes or becomes blocked, any spare capacity allocated to a stream is distributed to the immediate neighbors of the stream. In my understanding in your example A and B are blocked, C and D are immediate neighbors of A so according to this they would get the resources of A.
Received on Wednesday, 30 November 2016 11:33:23 UTC