Re: H2: Should there be a limit to tolerance ?
"Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Fri, 17 February 2017 11:32 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 EB50E129984 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 03:32:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 LFf7PovsfKse for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 03:32:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F7A812998C for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 03:32:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1cegjm-0002rM-Re for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 11:30:06 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 11:30:06 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1cegjm-0002rM-Re@frink.w3.org>
Received: from titan.w3.org ([128.30.52.76]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>) id 1cegjg-0000hH-RO for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 11:30:00 +0000
Received: from phk.freebsd.dk ([130.225.244.222]) by titan.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>) id 1cegja-0004nq-2n for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 11:29:55 +0000
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (unknown [192.168.55.3]) by phk.freebsd.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E975273F4; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 11:29:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id v1HBTVgP098992; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 11:29:32 GMT (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
To: Stefan Eissing <stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de>
cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
In-reply-to: <59877D7F-DD52-4158-A44E-EFA5DF0A2F62@greenbytes.de>
From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
References: <90502.1487325120@critter.freebsd.dk> <D199BE90-58D7-4E1B-A223-82A7D40651DF@greenbytes.de> <98899.1487330229@critter.freebsd.dk> <59877D7F-DD52-4158-A44E-EFA5DF0A2F62@greenbytes.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <98990.1487330971.1@critter.freebsd.dk>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 11:29:31 +0000
Message-ID: <98991.1487330971@critter.freebsd.dk>
Received-SPF: none client-ip=130.225.244.222; envelope-from=phk@phk.freebsd.dk; helo=phk.freebsd.dk
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-1.405, BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1cegja-0004nq-2n 2c042793796eba5184986a6ba6f7c226
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: H2: Should there be a limit to tolerance ?
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/98991.1487330971@critter.freebsd.dk>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/33575
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>
-------- In message <59877D7F-DD52-4158-A44E-EFA5DF0A2F62@greenbytes.de>, Stefan Eissing writes: >Sure. But do you think it should be part of the RFC? No, that's probably overdoing it. But I think it would make sense to loosely coordinate whavever criteria we chose, so that any future extensions don't have to navigate a needless minefield. Right now I'm pondering these two criteria: More than N (25?) frames in row didn't cause our state to change. and More than N (250?) extension points ignored. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
- H2: Should there be a limit to tolerance ? Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: H2: Should there be a limit to tolerance ? Stefan Eissing
- Re: H2: Should there be a limit to tolerance ? Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: H2: Should there be a limit to tolerance ? Stefan Eissing
- Re: H2: Should there be a limit to tolerance ? Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: H2: Should there be a limit to tolerance ? Martin Thomson
- Re: H2: Should there be a limit to tolerance ? Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: H2: Should there be a limit to tolerance ? Martin Thomson
- Re: H2: Should there be a limit to tolerance ? Poul-Henning Kamp