Re: Priority implementation complexity (was: Re: Extensible Priorities and Reprioritization)

Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net> Thu, 11 June 2020 08:00 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@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 8ACE23A1738 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 01:00:11 -0700 (PDT)
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=0.249, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lowentropy.net header.b=ccI1zE1J; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=RjK1j1/k
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 bGQ3k24NVb6o for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 01:00:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lyra.w3.org (lyra.w3.org [128.30.52.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0784A3A1757 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 00:59:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by lyra.w3.org with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1jjI7e-0001z9-SE for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 07:59:38 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 07:59:38 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1jjI7e-0001z9-SE@lyra.w3.org>
Received: from titan.w3.org ([128.30.52.76]) by lyra.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <mt@lowentropy.net>) id 1jjI7d-0001yO-FT for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 07:59:37 +0000
Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.27]) by titan.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <mt@lowentropy.net>) id 1jjI7b-0008My-Vt for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 07:59:37 +0000
Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19DAE5C0130 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 03:59:24 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 11 Jun 2020 03:59:24 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :subject:content-type; s=fm2; bh=0p74G3ddsSII8/rRecO9ddNJ8Zh4Mi2 YB/gsvX3vQH8=; b=ccI1zE1JFEdP7HVy1t5yFvIApM9xZIvukHMuCECoD590Xr3 BylNTx00au7oYoLtgJBphH7uLr2jv8zeBmy2GRUUDclR7LFdqw1wjsAPt7uxhxvc HMHG+vfiTEhfX7jHhsypDb0E5Kg22S/3hrIsTkgDy/QAUsTbX5fuU4SezIgCImei U649lFyBY7dDgho6xIWuXu7dT5I7BKTrbUAyZR+UqN7+YYfNRhcyAew4013mHiV0 Ghlr2TyQGHyptE2h884x1X+rAKV3v+AN4t3m6kGmToN4r5QJcg28yF4pPNAzy3wR jbAAg8b44EHskKZPz8ObRIIuw+qg5Mp35x7v+Yg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=0p74G3 ddsSII8/rRecO9ddNJ8Zh4Mi2YB/gsvX3vQH8=; b=RjK1j1/kHI9WDz29r24i9J jcD/1M8whjJmEBl7ahSx3QmMbXRbDp0WDYGF0Yi2HVHXACorQdoFFI4GmcshybdT KyEMSZeqZ46eQel0tALt7AcBpYwpx9QOPECt6M7GARgcMxq1Re6v1lGzNVaSHKWe tPFzM735sD/c68J/uNEWctpgmsHi9xvAgTBT4w5ATcpHDstGURd2t/dctLrk7o/J 8hhHYrY8LBjVnLJb9uPOcgMccdIeTT7p7W+FGar5jiKDMwaAApvF6mqpEmwfwzaH p0AWsy5Ki8P14gAP0ffmXCXFdSFx6hamw8hMkSFtUHdOnWEDjf+XIjY69/axYLMw ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:W-ThXp-8J0wN-J5as_cm5l2b-NULWcpw3wo8mnZP_5eqWt8dYi2QBw>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedrudehjedguddvkecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesth dtredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdforghrthhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehl ohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepheefteduudduhedtke fhvdfhteelffdujeegjeffheffveekudeigfeuveekfeelnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihii vgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnh gvth
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:W-ThXttF7CxvK0bynxwocvNg9C7nyomyRS77UGWEFaOMejrBJ0_MFg> <xmx:W-ThXnDYoK4LJmemzNWF8nRPvJ39qJLa78BfOnSAE_s4egzQrweyDQ> <xmx:W-ThXtczFMn0sM_LvAQBsvMV1BfGdEcJG5kryzU2WrMNolZRJuZfFQ> <xmx:XOThXgvltL4Wsi7Ey0QD2WvAiCppdxk_YQEtTb48hOT4z7cOVSLkxA>
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 8A9F1E00A9; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 03:59:23 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.3.0-dev0-525-ge8fa799-fm-20200609.001-ge8fa7990
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <f7c22c60-4d8e-4fd8-8b5e-cc8567bff81f@www.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACj=BEip6+7AunFsD=6qM5rsgrTfg6bRctOMu1gOe-KVjAW7Dw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALGR9obRjBSADN1KtKF6jvFVzNS1+JzaS0D0kCVKHKkd4sn+MQ@mail.gmail.com> <459C86F8-A989-4EF4-84DC-3568FF594F36@apple.com> <CANatvzwSpSHd7kZD-4tyMGkBJDdCBi6r_pLBvnaT8rrQy6SBHQ@mail.gmail.com> <CACMu3treK0m2mbpw9FebOjOcEed0bW-DbLbryHJH1DWAHoz+9g@mail.gmail.com> <CALGR9oZgE7ZfXdoYdUh9LUYC1fi8fMUyyTpvmV3GF7Z6Oxgg1g@mail.gmail.com> <20200609144428.GC22180@lubuntu> <CAJV+MGyuhxx=P6kZKktuREeq5pipZjxmwWP4jE_Sxhj_+krU2Q@mail.gmail.com> <CANatvzx_eg84V7UefOtSF+NHGHnTg7h-9n5bsRZRXxBqsaOkfQ@mail.gmail.com> <CACj=BEip6+7AunFsD=6qM5rsgrTfg6bRctOMu1gOe-KVjAW7Dw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 17:59:03 +1000
From: "Martin Thomson" <mt@lowentropy.net>
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Content-Type: text/plain
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=66.111.4.27; envelope-from=mt@lowentropy.net; helo=out3-smtp.messagingengine.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.8
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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1jjI7b-0008My-Vt e9b7fddf14a5daa2c2b7156af4b5742f
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re:_Priority_implementation_complexity_(was:_Re:_Extensible__P?= =?UTF-8?Q?riorities_and_Reprioritization)?=
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/f7c22c60-4d8e-4fd8-8b5e-cc8567bff81f@www.fastmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/37749
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: <https://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

On Thu, Jun 11, 2020, at 17:51, Yoav Weiss wrote:
> If that's indeed the case, we shouldn't define reprioritization *at 
> all*. Making it optional is a cop-out, which would result in 
> inconsistencies, meaning clients can't rely on it and need to 
> work-around its absence.

That is indeed what we are headed for.  But you can't levy a requirement on servers to implement something like this.  And even if they do, they won't all make the same decisions.

> We should decide if reprioritization is good or bad, based on as much 
> data as we can pull, and make sure it's implemented only if we see 
> benefits for it in some cases, and then make sure it's only used in 
> those cases.

I would like the first part.  For the implementation piece, that depends on the strength of the arguments behind the first bit more than it does on our actions here.