Re: Working Group Last Call The ORIGIN HTTP/2 Frame

• From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
• Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 10:47:33 +1000
• To: Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>
• Cc: Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Bence Béky <bnc@chromium.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Erik Nygren <erik@nygren.org>
• Message-ID: <CABkgnnXyJji=PAK01qW2xjui5KfOkHAaaNrR9bncQZKTz=P9gA@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 10:37 AM, Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com> wrote:
> so is ORIGIN_SUPPORT the equivalent of sending an empty ORIGIN frame in the
> previous draft?
>
> What's the benefit of additional moving pieces? It doesn't close the race
> condition as the client doesn't need to wait for settings to start writing
> requests..

But the server HAS to send SETTINGS.  So at least the waiting is
deterministic.  And in TLS 1.3, the server speaks first, so there
shouldn't be any waiting around there.  I agree that this is not ideal
for TLS 1.2, but you could simply decide not to wait and suffer the
consequences if you are wrong.

Received on Thursday, 28 September 2017 00:47:56 UTC