IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: proposed WINDOW_UPDATE text for session flow control windows

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Thu, 28 February 2013 05:16 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 8802F21F89CE for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 21:16:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.774
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.774 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.525, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KjzXOaO11CO9 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 21:16:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9EE921F89C3 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 21:16:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UAvq9-00028T-6p for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 05:15:33 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 05:15:33 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UAvq9-00028T-6p@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 1UAvpz-00027j-Mh for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 05:15:23 +0000
Received: from mail-we0-f181.google.com ([74.125.82.181]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1UAvpy-0000O8-8Y for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 05:15:23 +0000
Received: by mail-we0-f181.google.com with SMTP id t44so1164918wey.40 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 21:14:56 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=cwyginUg88cJxNAHO30RKoUmWdo0eXi43wtssPTlokc=; b=NG09wGKkiKX4As5wG+S1pFVupiUsz2y4UQ2HHn0+Uzn2L7pWci48TQ6OuA1ksY1hpT ZlF4PgydZveq95kPDaHielq4+SGQcO5T/QG+6oW8s7rkiI5CRe1Dj9KYc4Bmph4tPpsn n+ZqBeNYtrvLDaBDLo7AcB76VBA1JM/VxNvUBTd6zVg9i0/w2lkr8iLpQ1hs+qgX8s3R +dpI1XyTy9w+xBJfbjndRBJ/g8D2nDNUucXYVHCXrTno2yxr1g7fONx4ObaICv7xda2d n0yq9Ys4vgGMcT01S5FqshfrRO4IkCxOMwigkCginzFUroiDT6xDuVaNwAtp72oChuf/ OwZw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.5.137 with SMTP id s9mr8406218wjs.5.1362028495984; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 21:14:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.194.5.135 with HTTP; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 21:14:55 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAA4WUYhAQ_SLZvtumiuDV9rW7-FmJfY4PeQky1LZ6HpF7BpHUQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAA4WUYiH8tCF83=jsk_jsvhXkYvmJ+pPLFzhacAMq3O54z2YBw@mail.gmail.com> <CAOdDvNqCe3d7QerQaxiwdwJ+wC+4CGA4ZrLRYFY75nR2QFThog@mail.gmail.com> <CAA4WUYg2gn7Um1FZk3KBcP5aH=RpSCbYduFz3M+hZGQ_A4tsxQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAOdDvNqTNa=R1MzZe1mKZF34tW-=mhHnM_s_XPVzBBSEWHveVQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAA4WUYiW6xsT8g--1cL7HZTVYS_+5Y-WKpzfbx2JCLRqHXNgcQ@mail.gmail.com> <2595AFA8-9928-4511-B569-3DFC36B73C5C@mnot.net> <CAA4WUYg8ksyjKYmeX6YC3P1-iaRRSD_e5KDhpPw0d9i2CnvpSQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnU4=OYYZEkS7sfxWjXum+Mpx7RzUdJSzYa9a+UybESQYw@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNcDxJeU=7+x8Jx5TO0hm_P2yCKPu7_tEZF0GEtjMbQ2Xg@mail.gmail.com> <CAA4WUYh1qU6HPbeZTsFTy7i5svxWS2dATgUNyaoGnzbMLkCELg@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnUH5_t4BesWz2K5gtR0k0+ve42k-EWEaObK_nteh9fOUw@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNcZrQ072mQikMSnyFrKqN0yDYhh=-8G4848YxdO_M-_zw@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnU8Okqrq5POYZqDyFUoFzkQwjRAvQJQQ_jhCO9heaFYNA@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNd5bCpcVg7Z9Q=D1goYZ2keGnxPmy2G79O+h5K6bSa=cA@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnWgNHHHuCSXNpDQSVbaBTp=ZYnPH+MX9-_CXvaj4VD83w@mail.gmail.com> <A89944B3-8BB6-4B09-AF80-4F2C683A14EF@mnot.net> <CABkgnnVm30edw=ZQbyq9zUbLqQfWMi_YS9Y4n5MjNQTeM5GESg@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNc5WKbRRDXQ4-GLXXNaxp1njuKFvVHAO8ffa6VDhvBqRQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAA4WUYhAQ_SLZvtumiuDV9rW7-FmJfY4PeQky1LZ6HpF7BpHUQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 21:14:55 -0800
Message-ID: <CABkgnnXbtOm10VxbqfNaLrmkGTuf99AV9RhNTGq=iUGN80Y90w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: "William Chan (陈智昌)" <willchan@chromium.org>
Cc: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=74.125.82.181; envelope-from=martin.thomson@gmail.com; helo=mail-we0-f181.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-1.635, BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 1UAvpy-0000O8-8Y 29616f5d78d5a9a24f10e846fa273f6c
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: proposed WINDOW_UPDATE text for session flow control windows
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CABkgnnXbtOm10VxbqfNaLrmkGTuf99AV9RhNTGq=iUGN80Y90w@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/16925
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 27 February 2013 21:01, William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org> wrote:
> * Is there a reason to disable stream flow control, but not session flow
> control? Feels weird to me.

Yeah, I didn't worry about that because I did see a case for disabling
flow control in the other direction (session only) and providing a
graduated mechanism [ off, streams only, streams and session ] seemed
less intuitive than [ streams: on/off, session: on/off ].  Now, if few
enough people care about that, it's easy to disable all at once and be
done with it.

> Nit: I don't want to bikeshed too much, but my preference is to call the
> shed DISABLE_FLOW_CONTROL instead of END_FLOW_CONTROL. But whatever.

Noted, I'll do that.  I had DISABLE originally, but I thought END
sounded properly final.  After all, there is no going back.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email