- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 10:54:32 +1000
- To: Jana Iyengar <jri@google.com>
- Cc: Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>, Ian Swett <ianswett@google.com>, Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com>, QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 10 August 2017 at 10:46, Jana Iyengar <jri@google.com> wrote: > One other point: The PR now expects the server to push only after it's heard > a MAX_PUSH_ID from the client. Is it useful to still have the old boolean > that would indicate push is disabled by the client? Otherwise you have a > server that's waiting forever to push but can't because it didn't hear > anything from the client "yet". (Tertiary point: it might be useful for > various debugging/logging purposes to have an explicit disabling.) Maybe we can defer a decision on this. It seems like something that we might learn very easily from implementing. We could spend a lot of time speculating about what value that sort of signal might provide or we could wait to see if it is a real problem in practice. I suggest that we open an issue so that we don't forget.
Received on Thursday, 10 August 2017 00:54:59 UTC