Call for consensus: Priorities in HTTP/3

Mark Nottingham <> Thu, 08 August 2019 00:08 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F7F3120033 for <>; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 17:08:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.799
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.201, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.b=TEIGbO93; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.b=MLqW00Ld
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9hslKIZhUb4m for <>; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 17:08:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [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 (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E2D312006A for <>; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 17:08:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <>) id 1hvVvy-0007r9-5b for; Thu, 08 Aug 2019 00:05:34 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2019 00:05:34 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <>
Received: from ([2603:400a:ffff:804:801e:34:0:4c]) by with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <>) id 1hvVvt-0007qK-TV for; Thu, 08 Aug 2019 00:05:29 +0000
Received: from ([]) by with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <>) id 1hvVvs-0002he-H0 for; Thu, 08 Aug 2019 00:05:29 +0000
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal []) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72C0C206FC; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 20:05:06 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 07 Aug 2019 20:05:06 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; h=from :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject :message-id:date:cc:to; s=fm3; bh=/oKyg4iNzhbzpiSvFsb5fXTaVVVvUO 6cV8cMdqYLeBs=; b=TEIGbO93/wb79ZlVDqObdzRzXjKz0nXaicK9dRV24dLHJX e635yrMg/cdQE9XWlqKhmtQwypxlMeBwKjTB4ZyUYUOg4z4WflquNqQHMsytV4IK 46RDrXKm22hNK38jYK0nu7Tpxa42ZAeerA6V/2BZKEdv2afiQ2WMBTi7cPsvoB28 g4k9EYskY6CeIsqcio/HVy2ZV8o54fsGKm75FZ0/PzWhxDANYCspP9eWV6MPXPmB mQs7qSlg6RBvEmgcLF63lxeDv0Jgu4CIzp/cHIttd1uLLUjkZkwHzTJdE0YBq1cN k4lvTmraZC8mhmYoGQr44zfni1TIKo79+StuJ2sw==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=/oKyg4 iNzhbzpiSvFsb5fXTaVVVvUO6cV8cMdqYLeBs=; b=MLqW00LdPP0VtO7kj/UUQ/ AIiUQMrck8ZL4gN8p6CzaE6uiel6vU/+FWzYXCOYBQh3lNnsupVz1Lp4LE6Jv9Un aADhvJbn8x+wQ1xqFQBOPIJ7mCIlLhJc+F/NLWcgNOj9s4u02JNRDHcfZNc8KRtX fEDWK6f7s36JC0TrrvrnZTzO/VDGVWK2EN0v4kDmo/ebMX5VQw+ktDNUbnVNJmRK cfh5ZZd8pofpyk1B8QAYykoLLAv1broftLFafYelJ3FIkFqCrD4tUXzmD374Bbu7 0iRCq+rsA7JkkOYS5rQOxrSrUG9/739uxHp0ypv8LNwCW4OA7yiVmixF40LPmNTQ ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:MWdLXWOh2XbrzKsHTx3LPkOtFgZUFGcVSZT10MvdFnHeWD5W6piMSA>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduvddruddugedgtdefucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephfgtgfgguffkfffvofesthhqmhdthhdtjeenucfhrhhomhepofgrrhhkucfp ohhtthhinhhghhgrmhcuoehmnhhothesmhhnohhtrdhnvghtqeenucffohhmrghinhepfi efrdhorhhgpdhgihhthhhusgdrtghomhdpmhhnohhtrdhnvghtnecukfhppedugeegrddu feeirddujeehrddvkeenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhnohhtsehmnhhoth drnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:MWdLXQc8_2UZu5K9Emytu8uUTKx1APuOKkpK0wtKmRUzHX1dYH12iw> <xmx:MWdLXTsDsKupa2lEH3Li_fpHrxCTQIcTTAMq8fSliPwZ1RcsmgJJEw> <xmx:MWdLXRkfUpb2MTORKuPUTuYYYp4VnBeyN1txu0CBRRq63UFgQV77Tg> <xmx:MmdLXQ9QtPzv_lWT_1Vok8AcGxLbJkIbdW9HDiicevakA3Enn8II-w>
Received: from (unknown []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPA id BC34D80065; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 20:05:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mark Nottingham <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
Message-Id: <>
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 10:04:58 +1000
Cc: Tommy Pauly <>, Patrick McManus <>
To: HTTP Working Group <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=;;
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.2
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=3.593, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: 1hvVvs-0002he-H0 7c67d48ba3e467ffe170705ba31d0eeb
Subject: Call for consensus: Priorities in HTTP/3
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailing-List: <> archive/latest/36943
Precedence: list
List-Id: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>

In the Montreal meeting, we discussed the QUIC Working Group's intentions regarding HTTP/2 priority implementation in HTTP/3, which they are currently working on, but this WG will take control of upon publication.

The QUIC WG is required by their charter to ship "a description of HTTP/2 semantics using QUIC", which arguably includes HTTP/2 priorities.

However, after discussion, the overwhelming feedback we've received is that HTTP/2 priorities are not suitable for inclusion in HTTP/3. If they are specified, it is likely that a significant number of implementations will not support them.

As a result, we believe the best path forward is NOT to require the QUIC WG to include HTTP/2 priorities in HTTP/3. Doing so does not necessarily mean that HTTP/3 will ship without a priority scheme. The expectation is that work will continue (in the HTTP WG) to develop a new priority scheme that is suitable for HTTP/3 (and ideally, available as an extension to HTTP/2).

Meeting HTTP/3's timelines will require significant effort. We'll do our best to accommodate this work (e.g. giving time in Singapore), but by necessity, it's not clear what the outcome will be. If HTTP is ready to ship, but a new priority scheme is not agreed to, both this WG and the QUIC WG will have to determine a path forward at that time.

In Montreal, the sense in the room was quite strong that this is the correct path forward. If you have objections, please state them clearly; in particular, if you have new information. Please do so soon; we want to finalise this next week.

Upon consensus, we'll check this decision with both ADs to assure that QUIC remains within its charter. Once we resolve that, the practical and immediate outcome will be the removal of HTTP/2 priorities from the HTTP/3 specification; see <>;. 

In the meantime, note that a Design Team has already begun work on a concrete proposal; see the e-mail from Ian a little while back: <>⁩


Mark Nottingham