Re: reserved bit from Flags field | Re: new type number versus repurpose of existing field | … | Re: Setting to disable HTTP/2 Priorities

Lucas Pardue <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com> Fri, 09 August 2019 10:12 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 1A23012011F for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Aug 2019 03:12:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.799
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.799 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=0.201, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 1emTVJGrN3Cf for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Aug 2019 03:12:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [IPv6:2603:400a:ffff:804:801e:34:0:38]) (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 12314120118 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Aug 2019 03:12:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1hw1pz-0000PK-JC for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 09 Aug 2019 10:09:31 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 09 Aug 2019 10:09:31 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1hw1pz-0000PK-JC@frink.w3.org>
Received: from mimas.w3.org ([2603:400a:ffff:804:801e:34:0:4f]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com>) id 1hw1pu-0000OR-LZ for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 09 Aug 2019 10:09:26 +0000
Received: from mail-ua1-x92c.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::92c]) by mimas.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com>) id 1hw1pt-0002fO-2g for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 09 Aug 2019 10:09:26 +0000
Received: by mail-ua1-x92c.google.com with SMTP id o19so37538642uap.13 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 09 Aug 2019 03:09:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=69Wmhi392zQv8u/1Rsv7RxGwgREnKgMAY/I2WKIhTmU=; b=DXVld+Fo9Dsbr1eAskQ5N5PsSX7+GSQNxVeCU74LaZLPeD7okhT46qEj38mdjmZpAy OgAMf/mmhB2OToNx3VySJuS+miEBf+22xbC/yoPWvbZL+i62gXebnfTSxouO/YPxzeLf 4qs1mDx/MCcB7ZTTcin186Pmde2QSFe4qcQ0GZGIV9WZC/DQ6Wsbbpcl203DIqjf+H26 1FOhvlNUHlulIvpsy2ucoBQVVOSbZB83bTZZYyYtFXjo3WUaurpAss1r2WJaJOZn4sob JSqC2nIsMo7okT91XK72aWR3e2uCmI7+eWph0DauLNYOGjQodYaAPRFr5GDlU9tm+8bd tQ6g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=69Wmhi392zQv8u/1Rsv7RxGwgREnKgMAY/I2WKIhTmU=; b=CwdqERIiwJk0VIsnp0XEnZ/0yetJrZXmXLrZVFI9Ie6Mmxt99oDN62jjfarrios2y8 9qMHD3tERCFNlNIAkbNKWsHkHMH/V/vp1iJubJ/vqeeYja/6anFCPuZlATEa/kZTRtHh GRlb62n5k1X8RvhJggjynmT5jhPFxiN53Bz58Z5+tbCCgHlZjBQimokeqVqx6OGFJ/NA 8Vot/Mip9ZuVuPmXeqkmm80t0+h/jw60SYmpERKJuKZDt/OOpanncyco0YP5IpKF0840 tvnWzfY8q2OEd2dmUUWt9RfxfyOBLEsjS5dP0zcZ/wcPjnwgBwHxxMlQZNzPPFpbt5Sy +45A==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVcQUu/v9T3XtLvx4KnGryYv9jaJz4UvkwAmrugxyf4mJb0QrM1 7+hoLcdJqdL3SgUOJ4pDe1dKomk3goyJKepETn8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz4/fXdNByz1jMfM88gd3dO9cqF3AxdT1L7Ulsp8D7wYQPdNq5MOgoFXaCsRPT9593ZIPGOAkckzK+rM0H6uvc=
X-Received: by 2002:ab0:7491:: with SMTP id n17mr11703104uap.102.1565345344208; Fri, 09 Aug 2019 03:09:04 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190808173909.F07B645B6B@welho-filter4.welho.com> <20190809052701.1C4A4157CD@welho-filter1.welho.com>
In-Reply-To: <20190809052701.1C4A4157CD@welho-filter1.welho.com>
From: Lucas Pardue <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2019 11:08:52 +0100
Message-ID: <CALGR9oYvjcAnsYr+ZqxZCSidLbidf5n31pvTTe8NgnQkd5r_Ng@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au>, Brad Lassey <lassey@chromium.org>, Dmitri Tikhonov <dtikhonov@litespeedtech.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000314144058fac5d94"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::92c; envelope-from=lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com; helo=mail-ua1-x92c.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=1.493, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1hw1pt-0002fO-2g 33d80a83127265d8a3b82b2d1a7633c1
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3A_reserved_bit_from_Flags_field_=7C_Re=3A_new_type_num?= =?UTF-8?Q?ber_versus_repurpose_of_existing_field_=7C_=E2=80=A6_=7C_Re=3A_Setting_t?= =?UTF-8?Q?o_disable_HTTP=2F2_Priorities?=
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/CALGR9oYvjcAnsYr+ZqxZCSidLbidf5n31pvTTe8NgnQkd5r_Ng@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/36964
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 Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 6:27 AM Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>;
wrote:

> > <  ⋯ >
> > > > In Montreal we also discussed a possible experiment where the H2
> PRIORITY
> > > > frame contents would be repurposed, which requires a compatible
> server to
> > > > read it correctly. In this case the signal would be more like "will
> send in
> > > > an RFC7540-incompatible format".
>
> >
> > Yes, it makes sense to allocate new type number for PRIORITY when frame
> > content is repurposed.
> >
> > Also is make sense to allocate new type number for HEADERS when
> > "Stream Dependency" or "Weight" field of HEADERS frame conrent is
> repurposed.
> >
> > That avaind dance about on what point on time change of  "Stream
> Dependency" / "Weight" field"
> > field happens.
>
> Then there is also third possibility:
>
> Invent new field for new stype priority information (say "PRIORITY2").
>
> Indicate presense of PRIORITY2 field with (currently) reserved bit from
> Flags field (which
> is on part 9-octet header of all frames).
>
> There is unused flags bit available for both HEADERS and PRIORITY frame.
>
>
> And fourth possibility is indicate repurpose of current "Stream
> Dependency" / "Weight" field"
> with (currently) reserved bit from Flags field.
>
> These possibilities also avoid dance on what point on time change of
> "Stream Dependency" / "Weight" field"
> field happens.
>
> / Kari Hurtta
>
>
I'd treat both options as a class of change that RFC 7540 says MUST be
negotiated:

   Extensions that could change the semantics of existing protocol
   components MUST be negotiated before being used.  For example, an
   extension that changes the layout of the HEADERS frame cannot be used
   until the peer has given a positive signal that this is acceptable.


Changing frame flags relies on implementations both understanding the flag
and its meaning, which is difficult to do in an uncoordinated and robust
way. For example, adding a field and setting a flag that no one knows to
check will likely result in extant HEADERS frame parsers detecting a . size
error, resulting in a connection error. That's pretty high risk.

Lucas