From ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@listhub.w3.org Wed Jan 25 08:36:19 2023 Return-Path: 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 BE7CEC15153C for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 08:36:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.749 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.749 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=0.25, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VFPwB_SX6xqf for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 08:36:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from lyra.w3.org (lyra.w3.org [128.30.52.18]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44E63C15152D for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 08:36:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from lists by lyra.w3.org with local (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1pKijH-00CFNc-Tb for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 16:34:31 +0000 Resent-Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2023 16:34:31 +0000 Resent-Message-Id: Received: from mimas.w3.org ([128.30.52.79]) by lyra.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1pKijF-00CFMK-Pj for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 16:34:29 +0000 Received: from mail-lf1-x134.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::134]) by mimas.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1pKijE-00FDz5-Im for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 16:34:29 +0000 Received: by mail-lf1-x134.google.com with SMTP id a11so29993953lfg.0 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 08:34:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=rvzOJ+zmbvqvQFcs5A7x4cuZ+PKOnuOZ1qoZiUIHx5o=; b=oxkqkoDE2mJZDP2Vh7HSSfF8FI+PVRvXlBkByFIomDFy6Hx9Sajh9TkHfF82SJuJJU M5NiQKVG1I1pmUSMX9+0XP8dG/SFrAy+0B1j2TdptX+PdbwqisIOpmjo9vHO8qZoxgHU +sjg3qoObP04Oa+t2Wh/RnJDlglH0LT4pypiu+2BFR+IAYWuGV9S0oL/thDEFimlAxaA JDid2C9gra1Ia19RnC8l6Q+ZaYMqg7dy6MQSMil23hKxP2sJ9SoUwawf3o4ZYMs8DU6A COiEYZxFjeZfTHOCTaw1e6+Ag3h9Gp1cl4Y+uHlibpei4AWtCtoY9711BGPOv7mwrkI6 ON8Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=rvzOJ+zmbvqvQFcs5A7x4cuZ+PKOnuOZ1qoZiUIHx5o=; b=KBRZZtNOVEcGe4tFpb4gaxP0ksXYwkKlLItlgbMPj5RE58hUdPJb57LaWDoWzSS36j 89nacdMybGkAMr3qdQyAYDLNdlT+QbAt7yMmfCfGvqvTpuZG4cE14hd/W102GhtFTIvG IV5aPLbkG4zav7pIaBY8uxtn38x8iJaQ/fT5S9Hf74m8i+8HJEbbTdkmX4GBn/5N2HLY kCIGP7XzTKbjiFEEO2/mjWChV+k+NbmGvS1OBkGRWM3GitmTJ/wI20G+JwBsnYo1SA4T SOHhbxaG53tjnFc2NbzkrLciYNk2KR928RUn3MV75OlHcAd9DYNlCh26GNFc8qP7ZacF PpOg== X-Gm-Message-State: AFqh2kr7VySbQaWhQccM8qAhuZKZQhTzT8RXunHM+PfjrMKvuT63UyhH hJvcAU7EhgwdxpSFQUvWGP4kddiYNI7sjwhlQUU2+c7W X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMrXdXunJr9YRFP5y6vVPwXYkrx+YduSdcY1R5VJiWdhH17bRGSrCAhO3UKtpCAH+NY7g/pBCmZrV7CPlHZiqJyH6pg= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:3da0:b0:4cb:43e9:afd2 with SMTP id k32-20020a0565123da000b004cb43e9afd2mr1906000lfv.608.1674664456785; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 08:34:16 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Patrick Meenan Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2023 11:34:05 -0500 Message-ID: To: HTTP Working Group Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000010954b05f31934fa" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::134; envelope-from=patmeenan@gmail.com; helo=mail-lf1-x134.google.com X-W3C-Hub-DKIM-Status: validation passed: (address=patmeenan@gmail.com domain=gmail.com), signature is good X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.1 X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_WL=-1 X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1pKijE-00FDz5-Im d87491a907a7041fb75d0ee955221f91 X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org Subject: Heads-up, Chrome 111 introducing "incremental" priorities Archived-At: Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40712 X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org Precedence: list List-Id: List-Help: List-Post: List-Unsubscribe: --00000000000010954b05f31934fa Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Chrome 111 (currently in dev channel) will be using the incremental flag for most requests (most everything except for scripts and stylesheets). Safari already makes use of it but both Firefox and Safari use headers while Chrome currently uses priority update frames. IMPORTANT: one big difference is that Chrome currently omits the urgency in the value of the priority field dictionary if the urgency is the default and will send an "i" by itself (Safari appears to always send the urgency explicitly). I mention this because we're seeing an increase in protocol errors being reported that coincides with the revision where the flag was added. So far it looks like the mvfast implementation might not like the priority string (which appears to be a valid use of the dictionary structured type but maybe hasn't been exercised) but there may be other implementations that I'm not aware of that also choke on it (both the Google and Cloudflare quiche implementations seem to be ok with it). Thanks, -Pat --00000000000010954b05f31934fa Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Chrome 111 (currently in dev channel) will be using the in= cremental flag for most requests (most everything except for scripts and st= ylesheets).

Safari already makes use of it but both Fire= fox and Safari use headers while Chrome currently uses priority update fram= es.

IMPORTANT: one big difference is that Chrome c= urrently omits the urgency in the value of the priority field dictionary if= the urgency is the default and will send an "i" by itself (Safar= i appears to always send the=C2=A0urgency explicitly).

=
I mention this because we're seeing an increase in protocol errors= being reported that coincides with the revision where the flag was added.<= /div>

So far it looks like the mvfast implementation mig= ht not like the priority string (which appears to be a valid use of the dic= tionary structured type but maybe hasn't been exercised) but there may = be other implementations that I'm not aware of that also choke on it (b= oth the Google and Cloudflare quiche implementations seem to be ok with it)= .

Thanks,

-Pat
--00000000000010954b05f31934fa--