W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2021

Re: Results from adopting HTTP/3 priority

From: Yang Chi <yangchi@fb.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 15:22:54 +0000
To: Lucas Pardue <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com>, Alan Frindell <afrind@fb.com>
CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <MN2PR15MB3582BC5AB3FF952352AA0356C2419@MN2PR15MB3582.namprd15.prod.outlook.com>

Yes we consider priority level for retransmitting lost bytes, that is, the bytes are marked as real loss. Fresh data and loss buffer are scheduled together in our QUIC transport with respect to streamsí priorities. For PTO, we donít consider priority.


From: Lucas Pardue <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com>
Date: Monday, April 26, 2021 at 9:19 PM
To: Alan Frindell <afrind@fb.com>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Yang Chi <yangchi@fb.com>
Subject: Re: Results from adopting HTTP/3 priority
Hi Alan,

On Mon, 26 Apr 2021, 16:35 Alan Frindell, <afrind@fb.com<mailto:afrind@fb.com>> wrote:
The Instagram app for Android recently adopted HTTP priorities for HTTP/3 requests and I wanted to share our positive results with this group.

Thanks for sharing your findings. This is some valuable feedback.

Since you mention HTTP/3, I have a question about retransmission. It's not a part of HTTP priorities per se but does your implementation consider priority level for scheduling retransmission?

Received on Tuesday, 27 April 2021 15:44:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 27 April 2021 15:44:53 UTC