Re: handling bad priority parameters
Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Fri, 22 August 2014 17:55 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 (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C1E11A0695 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Aug 2014 10:55:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.67
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.67 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 fkMYijArytX5 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Aug 2014 10:55:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E5511A067F for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Aug 2014 10:55:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1XKt19-0004XS-7D for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 22 Aug 2014 17:52:51 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 17:52:51 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1XKt19-0004XS-7D@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1XKt0p-0004TF-TN for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 22 Aug 2014 17:52:31 +0000
Received: from mail-lb0-f181.google.com ([209.85.217.181]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1XKt0o-0000Xu-33 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 22 Aug 2014 17:52:31 +0000
Received: by mail-lb0-f181.google.com with SMTP id 10so9637375lbg.40 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 22 Aug 2014 10:52:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=v5HHNCpmzH41H1JOl+q37YwbBDaIPHHBzlhZZBn7404=; b=WAoyvqIqTD2k9ESB56e/qMnR0IHJYKb0B/Iu/P5TOU9y6ejE1VzBCsSQajeYhbKj72 /ed1ZnBTQ7+PF5/5LKC14WB9jPMUz3CHKShX/nq7W4TpUs24hUoB2rmJhf3Kqzp9zz5e deXKQQ7EmKvIoAl2GHb8wOFwwgu+AIMTPnxuxj3Ky4tv3apTWeup4HdRSEeBQQInjKR9 gZF1ZUIRtklfbG9J8PMxe8xXlqyrdKPrtvlBUKi8S3rbYwI/RH5XCz9qXFgH0MZ0Tjn2 Sk3vagnT980G+rcHXFVfwOGxuenDvoHOru0Ag2NSgX1oJW8Ff4NDOxAEbp2FEinBn8XJ nZ3Q==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.87.97 with SMTP id w1mr3730910laz.92.1408729923235; Fri, 22 Aug 2014 10:52:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.25.166.75 with HTTP; Fri, 22 Aug 2014 10:52:03 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CACweHNDzN2cQmLp69BsaKMw-B0rgvojJxz3CxsgQi6vcnGkCdw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACweHNDzN2cQmLp69BsaKMw-B0rgvojJxz3CxsgQi6vcnGkCdw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 10:52:03 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnXtteF-HD79XgJY3UTc9YBPbm=YgFwibQhL9X+w+O1T=Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.217.181; envelope-from=martin.thomson@gmail.com; helo=mail-lb0-f181.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.733, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1XKt0o-0000Xu-33 c2ff54869d72fcd542faa1672b10b47c
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: handling bad priority parameters
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CABkgnnXtteF-HD79XgJY3UTc9YBPbm=YgFwibQhL9X+w+O1T=Q@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/26708
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>
On 21 August 2014 20:30, Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au> wrote: > 1. What's the appropriate reaction if a HEADERS or PRIORITY frame includes > an invalid stream dependency? i.e. too large, odd when it should be even, > etc? I can see a case for allowing future IDs into the tree, completely > ignoring bad priority data, or for throwing a stream error. Which should it > be? My intent, which I failed to capture, was to say that if you don't have priority state for the parent stream, the dependent stream instead is given default priority (that means stream 0, weight 16). > 2. What do we do if we receive a trailing HEADERS frame that contains > priority info? I think that we should fix that too. https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/commit/620348d708aba641e4e09b0b7abd6960c199a764
- handling bad priority parameters Matthew Kerwin
- Re: handling bad priority parameters Martin Thomson
- Re: handling bad priority parameters Matthew Kerwin