On Wed, 12 Dec 2018, 16:38 Ian Swett <ianswett@google.com wrote:
> I don't want to derail this too much(probably too late for that), and no
> one has a PR anywhere close to landing, but I do think we should start
> thinking of these as potential extensions. I disagree that they're
> HTTP/2's primary features, both due to lack of use and lack of measurable
> benefits years after standardization. Push might actually benefit from
> being an extension, because then potential improvements(ie: cache-digest)
> could be integrated into the extension more quickly.
>
> On the other hand, QPACK is relatively complex but we have clearer
> demonstrations of it's benefit.
>
The corollary of Ian's point is: extracting something like push allows for
iteration of HTTP features without affecting the core HTTP/3 syntax.
Innovation without having to write quic-transport-bis, ter etc. which may
require more coordination effort that iterating using extensions.
That of course would assume that H3 is flexible enough or has has enough
extension points.
Lucas