IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7540 (4871)

Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com> Wed, 30 November 2016 13:34 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 AD43712947F for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 05:34:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.498
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.498 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=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, 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 cfaC5_IKvXym for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 05:34:26 -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 C720D129429 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 05:34:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1cC4y3-0000Ke-2b for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 13:30:35 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 13:30:35 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1cC4y3-0000Ke-2b@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 <kazuhooku@gmail.com>) id 1cC4xw-0008QV-Op for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 13:30:28 +0000
Received: from mail-wm0-f65.google.com ([74.125.82.65]) by titan.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <kazuhooku@gmail.com>) id 1cC4xp-0002mA-8g for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 13:30:23 +0000
Received: by mail-wm0-f65.google.com with SMTP id u144so29415623wmu.0 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 05:30:00 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=KcBpmxtlkDX87youkJQaNJ39MWXrwB0xWdKfhRXTmVs=; b=wb6z7erGxRItUZAvljdjzFUMo+vwTk2yTm8J1DsP9hvRSv3zm+0rA0wIa0GmyqAvbJ mDhb5ENVBAFuYjQzM2X8qUCrgpkYItQAHv+K7hZqJoLTO0bUKcKf2zJFauAjVWbc1ZxQ PnZqXDnMnEVg+OGJy+JvBhFNyICVdxHDckfkvaCCsplpn/+Z2p33sHGg5hdMUXiqJ1bt r7Cd8T9nBGTSLW59/0CbRlzte2OWrmeJLJfOwi5uksyJEqRhe5QFkaBsdEgYyRmrPT3W 5DbX/Y5WVVcSmM8O7wf/+vhho4zN/zCp682p7Yfk48FsEuLV1vcLSMBPxLPakhT/dBQR s7bA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=KcBpmxtlkDX87youkJQaNJ39MWXrwB0xWdKfhRXTmVs=; b=e7j12EjfdibuefpE+1RcJLIM0V8CH3WTi0zL7wX/Cgi9sPnRoKFl9sT/cryGExPeys AgOz9CYHKWDW77CuTH+w2Tl2ZBMQuyrc8BIfkXMCEQX9gYaN7n8wX+hT2yjtdtsLJbj4 tcR+lLx9IZU+G5Ezpcq+ANbuGhOJTQv1LudcuUH7IYx/Wr+LY9S8oJkY02zZ1G6nvz6R cHOhcnPe+UgrNoedP2TNm3GT31jMZRGIbYMRw4rYN3eprEot56uS9Q/GWQiq1AFatcyn EYVsuGlUDOgH2yGJhzPeyI7qfgIMyMqEiYe6unf/m2WdhdcbV203Y42zPKZrSDcaBhiZ hVtA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC03Y1rrwRisPkOJPphiMBE4wSSpMngarg5BdpsMQXnS8t45ExzLgsDw3czofWBS34uziJO5OGGPVBvv1Xw==
X-Received: by 10.28.98.66 with SMTP id w63mr30923191wmb.142.1480512593859; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 05:29:53 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.194.32.1 with HTTP; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 05:29:53 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <24141783-A04A-42AD-9730-EB5C91A36516@lukasa.co.uk>
References: <20161130043354.C786DB81319@rfc-editor.org> <1102C272-E8D6-40D3-9D39-7D4801ABD286@lukasa.co.uk> <CABkgnnXYTi0uv=Dm7zPrA=oPam+Zyka-jujFT2bU8GvqvT5JPg@mail.gmail.com> <03C57CE4-E61A-4BF6-A976-2191EB4B127C@lukasa.co.uk> <CANatvzzQZ_isxmd3Ne41QxE2s-sYsrksME+T0RtchM-K1b0DwA@mail.gmail.com> <24141783-A04A-42AD-9730-EB5C91A36516@lukasa.co.uk>
From: Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 22:29:53 +0900
Message-ID: <CANatvzygQViXZy0bxLzm3GK3KmVgT2qgSHio8V+3USDOYWxEGQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Cory Benfield <cory@lukasa.co.uk>
Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com>, Roberto Peon <fenix@google.com>, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>, Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>, Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, 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=74.125.82.65; envelope-from=kazuhooku@gmail.com; helo=mail-wm0-f65.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.6
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-0.536, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1cC4xp-0002mA-8g 05020edcaf392b66dc1df986ffa51244
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7540 (4871)
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CANatvzygQViXZy0bxLzm3GK3KmVgT2qgSHio8V+3USDOYWxEGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/33044
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>

2016-11-30 22:05 GMT+09:00 Cory Benfield <cory@lukasa.co.uk>:
>
>
> On 30 Nov 2016, at 13:04, Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> My understanding is that you do not need to distinguish between completed, idle and blocked states.
>
> For a stream under either of the three states, the weight associated to the stream is distributed to the dependents.
>
> That is what nghttp2 does and H2O does (except for the fact that it does not remember closed streams), and I this behavior is what is suggested by the spec.
>
>
> My understanding of what Martin is suggesting is that that isn’t true: blocked streams do not distribute their weight to their dependants.


Thank you for pointing that out.

My understanding is that there is no special casing for blocked
streams. Section 5.3.1 handles all the states we are discussing
equally, quote:

   Inside the dependency tree, a dependent stream SHOULD only be
   allocated resources if either all of the streams that it depends on
   (the chain of parent streams up to 0x0) are closed or it is not
   possible to make progress on them.

I also do not see why it would be beneficial to treat them differently.

>
> However, that’s also what the Python Priority implementation does.
>
> Cory
>



-- 
Kazuho Oku

v2.26.15 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status