- From: Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>
- Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 21:00:56 +0300 (EEST)
- To: Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
- CC: Lucas Pardue <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com>, Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Dmitri Tikhonov <dtikhonov@litespeedtech.com>, Brad Lassey <lassey@chromium.org>, Kari Hurtta <khurtta@welho.com>
> On Wed., 31 Jul. 2019, 02:56 Lucas Pardue, <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Kari,
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 4:52 PM Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Why boolean ("ENABLE") ?
> >
> >
>
> At the risk of bike-shedding, I think calling it "enable" is a bit of an
> issue. The setting, as an advertisement of the sender's capability, should
> say something like "will ignore" (for disabling 7540 priorities) or "can
> understand" (for enabling some other scheme).
>
> Unless we also feel the need to advertise "will not send"?
>
> Cheers
> --
> Matthew Kerwin
Yes,
SETTINGS_ENABLE_* typically changes how HTTP/2 connection is
prosessed or allows some usages which otherwise produce
protocol error (example: SETTINGS_ENABLE_CONNECT_PROTOCOL).
Therefore these these typically allows only 0 ⇒ 1 transitions.
Feature which is enabled, is not allowed to be turned off because
it may effect handling of frames which are already sent by
other peer.
Therefore I think that
SETTINGS_PROVIDE_HTTP2_PRIORITIES
is better name than
SETTINGS_ENABLE_HTTP2_PRIORITIES
In other words this does not chahneg parsing of HTTP/2
frames. Even when this is set to 0, sending priorities
does not cause protocol error.
In SETTINGS_PROVIDE_HTTP2_PRIORITIES server asks
client to provide (or not provide) http/2 tree
priorities.
( Another possible name is
SETTINGS_PROVIDE_TREE_PRIORITIES
)
/ Kari Hurtta
Received on Wednesday, 31 July 2019 18:01:56 UTC