Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7540 (4871)

Benedikt Christoph Wolters <benedikt.wolters@rwth-aachen.de> Wed, 30 November 2016 11:37 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@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 21BD4129680 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 03:37:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.398
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.398 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 474nbc_gSFhf for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 03:37:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C2DC12948F for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 03:37:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1cC38n-0000md-3a for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 11:33:33 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 11:33:33 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1cC38n-0000md-3a@frink.w3.org>
Received: from mimas.w3.org ([128.30.52.79]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <benedikt.wolters@rwth-aachen.de>) id 1cC38d-0000lF-Lr for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 11:33:23 +0000
Received: from mx-out-1.rwth-aachen.de ([134.130.5.186]) by mimas.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_CAMELLIA_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <benedikt.wolters@rwth-aachen.de>) id 1cC38V-0000dY-Pa for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 11:33:17 +0000
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.31,573,1473112800"; d="scan'208";a="562108610"
Received: from rwthex-s1-a.rwth-ad.de ([134.130.26.152]) by mx-1.rz.rwth-aachen.de with ESMTP; 30 Nov 2016 12:32:53 +0100
Received: from mail-qk0-f178.google.com (209.85.220.178) by rwthex-s1-a.rwth-ad.de (2002:8682:1a98::8682:1a98) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1236.3; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 12:32:52 +0100
Received: by mail-qk0-f178.google.com with SMTP id n21so205940851qka.3 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 03:32:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC016MWySvVTvz8F7kV0PeQZYX9BNOxDsndKMjm6PbzqDO3o+wdAsCPpPyIOPVCp+AJStRduGyisf4+HIEw==
X-Received: by 10.55.146.130 with SMTP id u124mr31409416qkd.176.1480505571317; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 03:32:51 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.12.145.233 with HTTP; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 03:32:20 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <1102C272-E8D6-40D3-9D39-7D4801ABD286@lukasa.co.uk>
References: <20161130043354.C786DB81319@rfc-editor.org> <1102C272-E8D6-40D3-9D39-7D4801ABD286@lukasa.co.uk>
From: Benedikt Christoph Wolters <benedikt.wolters@rwth-aachen.de>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 12:32:20 +0100
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAGZNdJWPy6DCNd10iLctD0_Q9tgC99btNWL4bSutD=2B72KmXA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAGZNdJWPy6DCNd10iLctD0_Q9tgC99btNWL4bSutD=2B72KmXA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Cory Benfield <cory@lukasa.co.uk>
CC: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com>, <fenix@google.com>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, <ben@nostrum.com>, <alissa@cooperw.in>, <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>, Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net>, <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Originating-IP: [209.85.220.178]
X-ClientProxiedBy: rwthex-w1-a.rwth-ad.de (2002:8682:1a9c::8682:1a9c) To rwthex-s1-a.rwth-ad.de (2002:8682:1a98::8682:1a98)
Received-SPF: none client-ip=134.130.5.186; envelope-from=benedikt.wolters@rwth-aachen.de; helo=mx-out-1.rwth-aachen.de
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.7
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_05=-0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.899, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1cC38V-0000dY-Pa f997a46a9b8f4ce4789055c53feaabcd
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7540 (4871)
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAGZNdJWPy6DCNd10iLctD0_Q9tgC99btNWL4bSutD=2B72KmXA@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/33036
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>

2016-11-30 9:41 GMT+01:00 Cory Benfield <cory@lukasa.co.uk>uk>:
> What happens if both stream A and B are blocked? Should my server endeavour to serve dependent streams in that case? I *think* the answer is yes because of the logic around having grouping nodes formed from idle streams, but I’m not 100% sure and would like clarification.

Section 5.3.4 Prioritization State Management states:
> Resources are shared between streams with the same parent stream, which means that if a stream in that set closes or becomes blocked, any spare capacity allocated to a stream is distributed to the immediate neighbors of the stream.

In my understanding in your example A and B are blocked, C and D are
immediate neighbors of A so according to this they would get the
resources of A.