HTTP/2 (RFC7540) tree priorities exit (opt out) | Re: ENABLE ⇒ PROVIDE | Re: SETTINGS_PRIORITY_SCHEME | Re: Setting to disable HTTP/2 Priorities
Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org> Thu, 01 August 2019 04:43 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 3F5BD12013D for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 21:43:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.201, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, 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 t5-qXny20nWP for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 21:43:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [IPv6:2603:400a:ffff:804:801e:34:0:38]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C211120139 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 21:43:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1ht2vA-000077-Js for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 01 Aug 2019 04:42:32 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2019 04:42:32 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1ht2vA-000077-Js@frink.w3.org>
Received: from mimas.w3.org ([2603:400a:ffff:804:801e:34:0:4f]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <khurtta@welho.com>) id 1ht2v7-00006F-Tg for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 01 Aug 2019 04:42:29 +0000
Received: from welho-filter2.welho.com ([83.102.41.24]) by mimas.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <khurtta@welho.com>) id 1ht2v4-00024b-Ta for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 01 Aug 2019 04:42:29 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by welho-filter2.welho.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCE65C3F2A; Thu, 1 Aug 2019 07:42:03 +0300 (EEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at pp.htv.fi
Received: from welho-smtp3.welho.com ([IPv6:::ffff:83.102.41.86]) by localhost (welho-filter2.welho.com [::ffff:83.102.41.24]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8XPGDTiEoGv6; Thu, 1 Aug 2019 07:42:02 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from kasvihuone.keh.iki.fi (89-27-39-95.bb.dnainternet.fi [89.27.39.95]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by welho-smtp3.welho.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1E2E2308; Thu, 1 Aug 2019 07:41:52 +0300 (EEST)
In-Reply-To: <CALGR9oYEgBUvPBhYpQm2-JL1bk9cEN9LnKpwk9tv0YR2rj42HQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20190725191746.GB12596@ubuntu-dmitri> <20190730154809.BBE3412178@welho-filter1.welho.com> <CALGR9oZnKo1JXnxLiKp+04kJeT5Uek3BiCPq=XSq4dG4B3AUBA@mail.gmail.com> <CACweHNDChKtVBTzQGctxAFdgZydrOKt8a9oAKrYbbq1JKLFPNg@mail.gmail.com> <20190731180108.D385BC3F0A@welho-filter2.welho.com> <CALGR9oYEgBUvPBhYpQm2-JL1bk9cEN9LnKpwk9tv0YR2rj42HQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lucas Pardue <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2019 07:41:52 +0300
From: Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>
CC: Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>, Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Dmitri Tikhonov <dtikhonov@litespeedtech.com>, Brad Lassey <lassey@chromium.org>
X-Mailer: ELM [version ME+ 2.5 PLalpha50a]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20190801044203.DCE65C3F2A@welho-filter2.welho.com>
Received-SPF: none client-ip=83.102.41.24; envelope-from=khurtta@welho.com; helo=welho-filter2.welho.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=0.892, BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.201, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1ht2v4-00024b-Ta baef5c5fd1ed349c8417f9afd67d9487
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: HTTP/2 (RFC7540) tree priorities exit (opt out) | Re: ENABLE ⇒ PROVIDE | Re: SETTINGS_PRIORITY_SCHEME | Re: Setting to disable HTTP/2 Priorities
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/20190801044203.DCE65C3F2A@welho-filter2.welho.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/36903
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: <https://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> Thanks. Along that line of thinking, maybe its simpler just to represent > this as an opt out flag? E.g. SETTINGS_RFC7540_PRIORITY_OPT_OUT which can > only ever be a value of 1. By default H2 endpoints have opted in and they > have a freedom to opt out. However, once they do so there are no take > backs. > > Lucas > > P.s.the cynic in me would call this SETTINGS_PREXIT. An endpoint that > invokes RFCticle 9050, needs to select a new deal or crash out to WT(FIF)O > priorities. > If peer implements HTTP/2 (RFC7540) tree priorities but is willing also to use other priority scheme, then either • HTTP/2 (RFC7540) tree priorities must be active until both peers have sent and received SETTINGS frame with HTTP/2 (RFC7540) tree priority opt out, or • peer needs delay sending SETTINGS frame with HTTP/2 (RFC7540) tree priority opt out until it is received SETTINGS frame which suggests some other priority scheme (or until server is received HTTP request with some other priority scheme). So it is important to consider how selecting some other priority scheme and opting out HTTP/2 (RFC7540) tree priorities interacts. I notice that SETTINGS parameter, which suggests of some other priority scheme ( or set of schemes), work as HTTP/2 (RFC7540) tree priority opt out IF initial value for that SETTINGS parameter is allowed to be unset. So SETTINGS_PRIORITY_MASK which I mentioned on other post may work if it's initial value is unset on HTTP/2 ( but 0 on HTTP/3). On that case HTTP/2 (RFC7540) tree priorities are active until peer is sent AND received SETTINGS frame with SETTINGS_PRIORITY_MASK parameter. So to crash out to WT(FIF)O priorities is sending SETTINGS frame with SETTINGS_PRIORITY_MASK value 0 (and receiving SETTINGS frame with any SETTINGS_PRIORITY_MASK value). In that case HTTP/2 (RFC7540) tree priorities also remain active if either peer does not implement SETTINGS_PRIORITY_MASK parameter. ( Assuming that HTTP/2 (RFC7540) tree priorities are implemented. ) I do not know can initial value for some SETTINGS paramater to be considered unset where unset is special meaning. If SETTINGS_PRIORITY_MASKS can not have initial unset value but it's value is allowed to include bit for HTTP/2 tree priorities, it also works. In that case initial value on HTTP/2 for SETTINGS_PRIORITY_MASKS includes only bit for HTTP/2 tree priorites. Calculating of new available priority scheme set must be delayed until SETTINGS frame with SETTINGS_PRIORITY_MASKS paramater is sent AND received. / Kari Hurtta
- Setting to disable HTTP/2 Priorities Brad Lassey
- Re: Setting to disable HTTP/2 Priorities Dmitri Tikhonov
- Re: Setting to disable HTTP/2 Priorities Lucas Pardue
- Re: Setting to disable HTTP/2 Priorities Brad Lassey
- Re: Setting to disable HTTP/2 Priorities Willy Tarreau
- Re: Setting to disable HTTP/2 Priorities Lucas Pardue
- Re: Setting to disable HTTP/2 Priorities Willy Tarreau
- RE: Setting to disable HTTP/2 Priorities Mike Bishop
- Re: Setting to disable HTTP/2 Priorities Kazuho Oku
- Re: Setting to disable HTTP/2 Priorities Willy Tarreau
- RE: Setting to disable HTTP/2 Priorities Mike Bishop
- SETTINGS_PRIORITY_SCHEME | Re: Setting to disable… Kari Hurtta
- Re: SETTINGS_PRIORITY_SCHEME | Re: Setting to dis… Lucas Pardue
- Re: SETTINGS_PRIORITY_SCHEME | Re: Setting to dis… Matthew Kerwin
- Re: Setting to disable HTTP/2 Priorities Willy Tarreau
- Re: SETTINGS_PRIORITY_SCHEME | Re: Setting to dis… Lucas Pardue
- ENABLE ⇒ PROVIDE | Re: SETTINGS_PRIORITY_SCHEME |… Kari Hurtta
- SETTINGS_HTTP3_PRIORITY_MASK? | Re: SETTINGS_PRIO… Kari Hurtta
- Re: ENABLE ⇒ PROVIDE | Re: SETTINGS_PRIORITY_SCHE… Lucas Pardue
- SETTINGS_ENABLE_HTTP2_PRIORITIES default value | … Kari Hurtta
- Re: SETTINGS_ENABLE_HTTP2_PRIORITIES default valu… Lucas Pardue
- Re: SETTINGS_HTTP3_PRIORITY_MASK? | Re: SETTINGS_… Lucas Pardue
- Re: ENABLE ⇒ PROVIDE | Re: SETTINGS_PRIORITY_SCHE… Matthew Kerwin
- Re: SETTINGS_PRIORITY_SCHEME | Re: Setting to dis… Matthew Kerwin
- Re: ENABLE ⇒ PROVIDE | Re: SETTINGS_PRIORITY_SCHE… Kari Hurtta
- HTTP/2 (RFC7540) tree priorities exit (opt out) |… Kari Hurtta
- Re: SETTINGS_ENABLE_HTTP2_PRIORITIES default valu… Willy Tarreau
- Re: SETTINGS_ENABLE_HTTP2_PRIORITIES default valu… Willy Tarreau
- [resend] SETTINGS_HTTP2_PRIORITY_MODEL (or SETTIN… Kari Hurtta
- Re: [resend] SETTINGS_HTTP2_PRIORITY_MODEL (or SE… Willy Tarreau
- Repurpose of priority | Re: SETTINGS_PRIORITY_SCH… Kari Hurtta
- Re: Repurpose of priority | Re: SETTINGS_PRIORITY… Lucas Pardue
- Repurpose of protocol elements | Re: Repurpose of… Kari Hurtta
- Re: Repurpose of protocol elements | Re: Repurpos… Lucas Pardue
- new type number versus repurpose of existing fiel… Kari Hurtta
- Re: new type number versus repurpose of existing … Lucas Pardue
- Re: new type number versus repurpose of existing … Matthew Kerwin
- Re: new type number versus repurpose of existing … Lucas Pardue
- reserved bit from Flags field | Re: new type numb… Kari Hurtta
- Re: reserved bit from Flags field | Re: new type … Lucas Pardue
- Re: reserved bit from Flags field | Re: new type … Kari Hurtta
- Re: reserved bit from Flags field | … | Re: Setti… Kari Hurtta
- Re: reserved bit from Flags field | … | Re: Setti… Lucas Pardue
- RE: Repurpose of protocol elements | Re: Repurpos… Mike Bishop
- Re: Repurpose of protocol elements | Re: Repurpos… Lucas Pardue