Re: [#150] Making certain settings mandatory

Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com> Sat, 29 June 2013 19:21 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 33F9421F9F79 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 12:21:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.976
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 66DS8buo8VHK for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 12:21:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 435EE21F9F77 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 12:21:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1Ut0hj-0003TM-58 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 19:21:03 +0000
Resent-Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2013 19:21:03 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1Ut0hj-0003TM-58@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <jpinner@twitter.com>) id 1Ut0hV-0003RG-7f for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 19:20:49 +0000
Received: from mail-oa0-f47.google.com ([209.85.219.47]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <jpinner@twitter.com>) id 1Ut0hU-00061u-67 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 19:20:49 +0000
Received: by mail-oa0-f47.google.com with SMTP id m1so3460822oag.6 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 12:20:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=twitter.com; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=BkNGKyJrfK1MVQ3DpvrJsfbrTD7ydUX4tbyB38wfNhE=; b=E1iXcP7BspDW3ul+n2nR6KMnaHee9eOj6uXep2kFgSfdb/NIUZ2rTJ0/zbKwC8M3nK i3d/1H7t7z8b0ywmXV1XpZAsSn9Jqpmx+XZWvh92mOkKuB6V+LAFVJrOVlhtzQi24Suw pUxe0WVPJaCLpxDthpnAoevGGVqTA8hP3GJA8=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=BkNGKyJrfK1MVQ3DpvrJsfbrTD7ydUX4tbyB38wfNhE=; b=kP6HtVstk2+f0rPJpOq72r7EFn0oFAX9jRivzzB+aZk9mkh00+3nY9AEemEG5xCWb1 oapUvXr7k5bbzYGxeLKOC2H+fEugu3H8njbzulkmDVMS7/+lHFGOUIQPR4jcbISeMYiZ unR0ndLQ6opwxNiHuyBq//yibw29b3He98XlRaNBeyzFJxlV3szzeu2UAQpgitL6Cric YI0q8Tq7qi7RRCUC/oRAyIqCXyVzKpdq9ZWpgYNNf28QZA2k0ENrEJuosBx/MjIT1UNV if1gP9c0Wy4lCwYSU+TVyXuj6VHOrOIgnaoogMHw6khKY2W2MXW814Dipvr53VxnVWGH rGtw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.173.169 with SMTP id bl9mr7420209oec.51.1372533622167; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 12:20:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.182.7.37 with HTTP; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 12:20:22 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAP+FsNd9dVzRBv1iXS59XQEkk32rK9EtfQs=c1rp+yYHSbG5dQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABkgnnW2xi3pAKyg2Abi15Gb11ZCFi+D_QUQw1566BVXb65iHg@mail.gmail.com> <CABaLYCs8vb35CoL+A4mh7-PkbnKXxjz+jCJ_z-ivzYnYKF=VWQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+pLO_gFrAow2==sZx8_57Hw81d24V4HaqJCEc63WhZSAoWdBA@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNd9dVzRBv1iXS59XQEkk32rK9EtfQs=c1rp+yYHSbG5dQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2013 12:20:22 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+pLO_ijfgbkYEKXn3xUq5-Kxw69k4oQhMc8+fL5tTtenN2x3A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com>
To: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
Cc: Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e011761c9fdea2304e04fe22d"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQng40B/r/PEqTBxNSRg8QC9hXww23Iz41VUGdX206Eg0zSoUBzV7Vv9dpePskVN9YtTixBM
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.219.47; envelope-from=jpinner@twitter.com; helo=mail-oa0-f47.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-3.100, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1Ut0hU-00061u-67 e8197c7885eceb2b57b54e09653f3d5a
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: [#150] Making certain settings mandatory
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CA+pLO_ijfgbkYEKXn3xUq5-Kxw69k4oQhMc8+fL5tTtenN2x3A@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/18421
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>

If you don't want them to be mandatory then don't make them mandatory as
part of the Upgrade mechanism and rely on the defaults if you choose to
upgrade without including them.

Consistency :)


On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com> wrote:

> Ug. Slippery slope.
> I'm happy to say the settings frame is mandatory, you SHOULD send settings
> you care about in the initial settings frame, and otherwise you get what
> you get.
>
> This is less complicated. What would be the result of not having the
> mandatory fields in the settings frame as proposed above? If it isn't
> 'close down the connection', the requirement is useless.
>
> -=R
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 To consistent handling of frames, whatever the rules are.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I believe the bytes are completely inconsequential.
>>>
>>> My goal with this was to make it so there is only one set of rules for
>>> SETTINGS frames.  Currently, there is the "oh this is the first settings
>>> frame rules".
>>>
>>> This is not going to have impact on performance, but removing edge cases
>>> is desirable to me.
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Martin Thomson <
>>> martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> This pull request proposes to make two settings mandatory in every
>>>> SETTINGS frame: SETTINGS_MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS and
>>>> SETTINGS_INITIAL_WINDOW_SIZE.
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/pull/150
>>>>
>>>> Gabriel's proposal for an HTTP/1.1 header for carrying settings in the
>>>> Upgrade made these mandatory only at that point, which didn't cover
>>>> the TLS handshake, or just starting from prior knowledge.
>>>>
>>>> Two questions:
>>>>  - Do we want to make any settings mandatory, or are defaults
>>>> acceptable?
>>>>  - Is this the right trade-off? Or are the 16 bytes on subsequent
>>>> SETTINGS frames completely intolerable.
>>>>
>>>> Note that if we make these settings mandatory, there might be other
>>>> settings in the future that will also be mandatory; e.g., the
>>>> compression context size.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>