- From: Hadil Sabbagh <hadil.sabbagh@xeia.io>
- Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2017 18:04:31 -0700
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Thank you Martin. That clears it up for me. Hadil > On Jul 10, 2017, at 6:03 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 11 July 2017 at 10:56, Hadil Sabbagh <hadil.sabbagh@xeia.io> wrote: >> I am interested in the case where an open stream receives a PUSH_PROMISE on that stream with another stream id to be used. The RFC, as best I read it, does not specify that it goes into a half-open local/remote or any other state for the promised stream. > > When you send PUSH_PROMISE, there are two streams: > > 1. The stream that carries the PUSH_PROMISE is a client-initiated > stream, one where the client made a request. That stream will always > be open or half-open when the PUSH_PROMISE is sent/received. That > stream doesn't change state as a result of the PUSH_PROMISE. > > 2. The promised stream is a server-initiated stream. That stream will > always be idle when the PUSH_PROMISE is sent/received. The promised > stream then becomes "reserved" when the PUSH_PROMISE is send/received. > > Does that help?
Received on Tuesday, 11 July 2017 01:05:06 UTC