Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE

Gábor Molnár <gabor.molnar@sch.bme.hu> Tue, 30 July 2013 08:31 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 DC57821E80C4 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 01:31:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.677
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.677 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, 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 eMTFBNeUYIPh for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 01:31:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 981A521F9E53 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 01:28:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1V45H3-0005mT-Qm for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 08:27:17 +0000
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 08:27:17 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1V45H3-0005mT-Qm@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <gabor.molnar@sch.bme.hu>) id 1V45Gr-0005lH-39 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 08:27:05 +0000
Received: from balu.sch.bme.hu ([152.66.208.40]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <gabor.molnar@sch.bme.hu>) id 1V45Gm-00062u-C2 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 08:27:05 +0000
Received: from mail-oa0-f53.google.com (mail-oa0-f53.google.com [209.85.219.53]) by balu.sch.bme.hu (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-7.05 (built Sep 5 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0MQQ00EI0Q48OY00@balu.sch.bme.hu> for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 10:26:34 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-oa0-f53.google.com with SMTP id k14so15271899oag.40 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 01:26:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.64.32.36 with HTTP; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 01:26:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.50.22.72 with SMTP id b8mr40954igf.17.1375172791957; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 01:26:31 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 10:26:11 +0200
From: =?UTF-8?B?R8OhYm9yIE1vbG7DoXI=?= <gabor.molnar@sch.bme.hu>
In-reply-to: <51F6D058.4010508@ogre.com>
To: Leif Hedstrom <leif@ogre.com>
Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, Ilari Liusvaara <ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-id: <CA+KJw_6SjgYOjv20=7cZhht=Wrbqqv68B+5SfJOSSMQ7D_Zosw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=q/i1VkDAAnO5UhusG2qrvxwRSzGM6jWxZ6whfCHI3OI=; b=SW2D7qiVeqyEKyB2+ohqsMnltQTGNV5OY+pRWEN3/drTUX1dqDmxFxD5wN6WTtLvlb vb0Lsw1lBS42Trfw51bFkVRsBcQsF8e7ddozXryzd9RMEkpn3Uj5Ky6CuqSLO5iqgPcp E0ysonSbCTf23nwVaHHvihHSSP2kqe8k1e0vPW8Bfi5BZwu2QSIjcetjVO+Ft7XAh+c9 qY4gZftaMI5a1Oio3xxYT20GbtpTYuXbmxgt2JrETo11CVtPJBqSu6w5XY6PwKdIpYi2 ERUN6LoO6VmhDHKiUd3wvGZkoEFBYawfcbYft2GZdDbbz4IAtvFlrHHNBGk7NEgeRmmU W3Xg==
References: <CA+KJw_5PcUxBiUnQ00=G2C4Q6MnaB=hpNDk+9eTeZMs3Lz-CpA@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNf7YBDfO_=fW7nPHXdUi0F+0+4S2AUm_T2gHtqYhER8MA@mail.gmail.com> <20130723190419.GA25817@LK-Perkele-VII> <CAP+FsNc5tef8WRCaH-_6z5se=vVPscSQ3+GfEF0T02q8oKq6WA@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnWx5d_3U+tFQYG68+NCGC3Q2Hfm_PD0hgALeawb+PY-ZA@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNfauVPhGZH31_LFeQKOuPF0KcYKp7U4qMBtDUsv-Ja-cQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnV7ZZ_MWeuP2cDKombNWJJahES02XYTJh0OJY7yo17ytQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNfgEqP2dwHsG0RD2ZizpVNw=98mTJ=1Q33b3UK8NdhjYA@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnUK45jVj1f=QuJnE7w3gSWJZ_jAPq=87SLyvyGYxUt0kw@mail.gmail.com> <51F6D058.4010508@ogre.com>
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=152.66.208.40; envelope-from=gabor.molnar@sch.bme.hu; helo=balu.sch.bme.hu
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.0
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-1.138, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.544, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1V45Gm-00062u-C2 9c9fdb29dc8303d520c2aed86b87b843
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 and PUSH_PROMISE
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CA+KJw_6SjgYOjv20=7cZhht=Wrbqqv68B+5SfJOSSMQ7D_Zosw@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/18972
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>

I'm OK with either solution (forbid push when max_streams=0 or signal
difference between two situations). From an implementation
perspective, I don't think many public server would support sending
PUSH_PROMISEs when they cannot push the actual content.

2013/7/29 Leif Hedstrom <leif@ogre.com>:
> On 7/24/13 1:43 AM, Martin Thomson wrote:
>>
>> On 23 July 2013 15:38, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm a proxy guy, actually.
>>
>>
>> I think that onus is on Roberto to more effectively motivate the need
>> for this distinction.
>>
>> If indeed we agree that the two cases are distinct, then we probably
>> need to consider ways to communicate this distinction effectively.  A
>> separate setting that expressly disables push promise or limits the
>> number of promises might work.
>>
>
> I'm very much in favor of this, be explicit about the client option to tell
> the server to never send push promises. It avoids any potential semantics
> overloading issues that we haven't yet foreseen. Plus, Roberto makes some
> pretty compelling arguments as to why it can make sense for a client to set
> MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS=0 but still want to see the push promises.
>
> -- Leif