Re: Design Issue: PUSH_PROMISE and Stream Priority

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Thu, 25 April 2013 23:49 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D16FE21F9741 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 16:49:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.499
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=3.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UcZAi+ZI8Lyz for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 16:49:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16BC321F973D for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 16:49:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UVVuk-0006ky-3P for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 23:49:22 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 23:49:22 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UVVuk-0006ky-3P@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1UVVuV-0006jZ-Vn for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 23:49:08 +0000
Received: from mail-wg0-f48.google.com ([74.125.82.48]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1UVVuV-0001Zz-A9 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 23:49:07 +0000
Received: by mail-wg0-f48.google.com with SMTP id f11so1781803wgh.3 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 16:48:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=TJtlvUPUuwLtPppQTup3MBhLVcZx0oi8cgnDtSV5to4=; b=t4QOXwsGlj/9aB1Y1i1KPMW/4Nj2fztWdUQjhYSpfyewQNXG87d0Tv7x5cnyW1PWdh kpB1C71SHGCfRFLLbz+Im1bPcPUaAEKRDomUurCo3CXaxhsC4tAeq+r4+hHn0bYbKL5j NXtdQj291PAO3fltoNR+55iwtZ4+WwQfgnJdIA1VSMgtTcd8Pz2m6xZhISAElEQvSaeZ KQ7p8AcEiMmluRI2DOg5ffOc+GfHOBbH40Pjs0qEgTQX9pkA72XlGqX/TBRSDEx5S9M3 DIXXkZ0RFSJ+60Ou4Hdy218W/DjXv4dge4M5vDeB0q6PdeYC1veX4udJdqIJ/qq+5PzV 0Zbg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.235.196 with SMTP id uo4mr6785950wjc.30.1366933721102; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 16:48:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.33.102 with HTTP; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 16:48:41 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABP7Rbf_hZ036vUs4LNTrGQ91kft2_97aV-9Gi2KVJnUJphbNA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABP7Rbf_hZ036vUs4LNTrGQ91kft2_97aV-9Gi2KVJnUJphbNA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 16:48:41 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnUBEvDtNQM8G5vyfyqRz4tQ8su9+14gMTdaXhzY2cq+Kg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=74.125.82.48; envelope-from=martin.thomson@gmail.com; helo=mail-wg0-f48.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.575, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1UVVuV-0001Zz-A9 a75df85b2e6fd60c7cd2089ad4c1e473
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Design Issue: PUSH_PROMISE and Stream Priority
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CABkgnnUBEvDtNQM8G5vyfyqRz4tQ8su9+14gMTdaXhzY2cq+Kg@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/17588
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Good point.  The hope was that a reprioritization frame would be
proposed (Will, Roberto, we're all still waiting).

If that's enough, then adding a default (maybe 2^30) would fix this.

On 25 April 2013 11:03, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>; wrote:
> https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/75
>
> The current draft (-02) says, "The endpoint establishing a new stream
> can assign a priority for the stream."
>
> However, the spec does not define how a stream established using
> PUSH_PROMISE can assign the priority for a stream, nor does the spec
> discuss whether the notion of stream priority applies to push streams.
>
> The spec currently states that PUSH_PROMISE is followed later on by a
> HEADERS frame.
>
> If priority applies to push streams, then we need to add that priority
> can be assigned by allowing the use of a HEADERS+PRIORITY frame.
> Otherwise, we need to clarify the spec text to say that push streams
> have no priority.
>