6.5.2 FLOW_CONTROL_OPTIONS text

Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com> Tue, 23 July 2013 21:02 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 D179A11E8159 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 14:02:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.976
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 4wncrGKmFCb8 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 14:02:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E2D511E8135 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 14:02:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1V1jhs-0003IV-4n for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 21:01:16 +0000
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 21:01:16 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1V1jhs-0003IV-4n@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <patrick.ducksong@gmail.com>) id 1V1jhj-0003G5-3h for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 21:01:07 +0000
Received: from mail-ob0-f180.google.com ([209.85.214.180]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <patrick.ducksong@gmail.com>) id 1V1jhh-00083J-Rj for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 21:01:07 +0000
Received: by mail-ob0-f180.google.com with SMTP id eh20so11069091obb.39 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 14:00:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=ZDLsHZjuFI10IwHPrfM2hLaZ+f4XxYq3L7GucQGe0Fk=; b=jNfE0VzN7qqyz+sWXRsB3/F0UdBeAV1zKuqb0EsWOEeE9vRfdpHqw7R7xaPh3dgilp BIWlLywGbPh+Tn6Js7Q3rx4Fg58Xt//96aIgEn/1JW4+5h6x35E+iNo3Qsqgi0f3L43Z 8JaaonQ7qf8G88w35RqPj6tmwMBSy0A+/e1I5dfyEzHEBN+KrQTppEv2u9Y2eEXBrH3E K/ss+MUYC5z2l5S4D3A/vLxmDWjftQXr1r0/2La1dPfZJ3N/V50ogSGRoecV5/3hy/3o BJH7v3CyJedJDbxEb+ZO4rrzGbZChnoD0TNUhp0GC1q4GDTARKGhSsqa4UORHyNHWiPi IyGQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.80.33 with SMTP id o1mr26291746obx.21.1374613239726; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 14:00:39 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: patrick.ducksong@gmail.com
Received: by 10.76.152.133 with HTTP; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 14:00:39 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 17:00:39 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: s8IoViixC7W9B7_XmsNYNbST99Q
Message-ID: <CAOdDvNoTsJn-MqdpTG7viHXWwRcA-v+rePVZCRkWUALM_2vgBg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7b2e4402db87de04e23415cb"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.214.180; envelope-from=patrick.ducksong@gmail.com; helo=mail-ob0-f180.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.655, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1V1jhh-00083J-Rj 25d4643795d17c6a1f917208a1e74ea4
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: 6.5.2 FLOW_CONTROL_OPTIONS text
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAOdDvNoTsJn-MqdpTG7viHXWwRcA-v+rePVZCRkWUALM_2vgBg@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/18887
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 found this really confusing:

  SETTINGS_FLOW_CONTROL_OPTIONS (10):  indicates that streams directed
      to the sender will not be subject to flow control.  The least
      significant bit (0x1) of the value is set to indicate that new
      streams are not flow controlled.  All other bits are reserved.

      This setting applies to all streams, including existing streams.

      These bits cannot be cleared once set, see Section 6.9.4
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-04#section-6.9.4>.


1] does the value always need to be 1? The option as a whole is defined to
indicate that "streams .. will not be subject to flow control" - so not
setting the value would seem to be inconsistent. But if the value can only
be 1, why define a value at all? Maybe the option definition is misleading
and should be "whether or not streams will be subject to flow control"?

2] "This setting applies to all streams, including existing ones".. but the
"value is set to indicate that new streams are not flow controlled"
(implying existing streams are not impacted).

3] "These bits cannot be..".. bits is plural, but only 1 bit is defined.

barring better advice, for my -04 implementation I am going to test the low
bit of the value, and if true apply the logic to all present and future
sends directed to the sender of the option.