Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers
Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Mon, 01 July 2013 20:04 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 77E3711E8211 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Jul 2013 13:04:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 N59G31tKKk8K for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Jul 2013 13:04:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AEBF11E819C for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Jul 2013 13:04:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UtkIs-000156-Kx for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 01 Jul 2013 20:02:26 +0000
Resent-Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2013 20:02:26 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UtkIs-000156-Kx@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1UtkIl-00012g-Ch for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 01 Jul 2013 20:02:19 +0000
Received: from mail-wi0-f178.google.com ([209.85.212.178]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1UtkIg-0000J9-Kg for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Mon, 01 Jul 2013 20:02:19 +0000
Received: by mail-wi0-f178.google.com with SMTP id k10so3463782wiv.11 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Mon, 01 Jul 2013 13:01:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=sD3cWTkzr9xPpMC6TkCjYYUqGLLpjIYiRnd2zMe1UnA=; b=Vx/NpqNGIvvBjBnbn1WTdaGK8aKEhaft1tgOAGKp80/ko1gXr4W6VNngw50lCTLKXs UpsgmKzfRMbyS7xrLnMdu5sUlLYAECX6i4+EQzSOioQPPqKfr+LNDdOqzlWR9nIJy5kC vOMbdIXuUHfbQ52/XnM3aPx/8c0lfd73EqDeQoHeZnpZBmAQfiquQ+UCt2WtBg4s7boY fmMF31TH7VoC1zxanKns0Xsj2/HANGNy4tX2nMNuf3G+wJwhscpZBd82R9t5TkzyaTuo Fve1AbNWrzZFN87hjih/P5s1+EzVM7foYAgqgV1Q9jP019+VNBOeCQX6V2zI+Z10m6Sf MWjA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.77.99 with SMTP id r3mr21257792wjw.5.1372708908447; Mon, 01 Jul 2013 13:01:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.60.46 with HTTP; Mon, 1 Jul 2013 13:01:48 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <b7f7bb824fe34aa9ab92d22716d25b3f@BY2PR03MB025.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CABkgnnVGh9dLkfDrO2fq5TsnxwEu0Dff=LqJEJR5Odq2ibfDMg@mail.gmail.com> <CABP7RbcoSSSKJq3YbZ2ypw-xb0uOgFQcjcQP9tJdkgEjPfJVMA@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNdJcZ_x6RidaVfP+VPtA3CwAbALgAqhOhAjZLzaz4tQRQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABP7Rbf_pGKU-yB-f=6fB5WoVvs087eOf6Beo4DDHGJWYX5XTQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNd9BDHBO2YXEfHwvRuiJDDpbAEvCMR2BKLzcoaARxjDJA@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNcEf6s5s7Jk=NLKdrdU8fV1AsSJ4u-8CZNT8P7YXvxkag@mail.gmail.com> <CABP7RbdoBswznxwDm+-00egSHV+h7fO7Ow+aw+mFhLm2Z=GRWg@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNf-m8toh_KNN0dinwCvP_+2JBKq8OWrany2sHM+c2js3A@mail.gmail.com> <b7f7bb824fe34aa9ab92d22716d25b3f@BY2PR03MB025.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2013 13:01:48 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnWPcPEij7P-DCvHOwNxSB8pqxRvWVwn==Aaxf1a0-3Dvg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>
Cc: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.212.178; envelope-from=martin.thomson@gmail.com; helo=mail-wi0-f178.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-1.749, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1UtkIg-0000J9-Kg 49155b11f5e8a459c17af5b19ec5d21d
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CABkgnnWPcPEij7P-DCvHOwNxSB8pqxRvWVwn==Aaxf1a0-3Dvg@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/18452
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>
On 1 July 2013 11:44, Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com> wrote: > There are some wasted bytes if the server sends back the entire request > headers, since the headers are supposed to be copied from the initial > request and the client already knows what it sent. Are we presuming that > the server is sending back only the headers whose values it wants to > override? (If so, how does the server express that it wants to drop a > header, override it to empty?) I think that this is the bit that will need additional refinement. As this describes, the headers that are included in PUSH_PROMISE replace headers (or add new ones) that are in the associated request. That leads to some interesting questions with respect to compression. Maybe the right way to do this is to have PUSH_PROMISE include ALL headers from the associated request, and then use that associated request as the reference from which compression builds. Of course, that would be grossly premature, given how little we know of usage patterns for push.
- [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Martin Thomson
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers James M Snell
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Roberto Peon
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers James M Snell
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Roberto Peon
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Roberto Peon
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers James M Snell
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Roberto Peon
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers David Morris
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Amos Jeffries
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Yoav Nir
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers James M Snell
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Jeff Pinner
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Michael Sweet
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers David Morris
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Amos Jeffries
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Martin Thomson
- RE: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Mike Bishop
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Martin Thomson
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers James M Snell
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Martin Thomson
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Sam Pullara
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Martin Thomson
- RE: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Mike Bishop
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers James M Snell
- RE: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Mike Bishop
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Roberto Peon
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Amos Jeffries
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers Roberto Peon
- Re: [#153] PUSH_PROMISE headers William Chan (ιζΊζ)