- 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