Re: [hybi] I-D Action: draft-ietf-hybi-permessage-compression-09.txt

[Takeshi Yoshino <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 9:31 PM, Tobias Oberstein <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> > Unless there's any existing difficulty, c2s_no_context_takeover should
> > be supported widely, I think.
>
> The current draft reads:
>
> " It is RECOMMENDED that clients implement the
>    "c2s_no_context_takeover" parameter."
>
> It's not "MUST implement" .. so there might be client which won't, and
> then a server has no chance to adapt it's response to the client and
> maximize likelihood of connection success given it ideally wants to
> activate "c2s_no_context_takeover".
>

Oh, this is a bug. This should be MUST.


>
> >
> > Your suggestion allows a client to force a server which is reluctant to
> > but can enable c2s_context_takeover to enable it. Do you think it's
> > important functionality?
>
> Why is that?
>
> The presence of "c2s_no_context_takeover" in the client's offer would just
> signal to the server that the client supports the feature and the server
> MAY enable it.
>
> Why signal feature presence for "c2s_max_window_bits", but not
> "c2s_no_context_takeover"?
>
> Maybe it's just me, but the asymmetry was a source of confusion to me.
>

This makes sense. But as I said above I wanted to mean
c2s_no_context_takeover implementation is mandatory for clients. Once the
fix is made on the spec, it would be rather confusing that we have
announcement about mandatory feature.


>
> I think it would make the spec more consequent, and the change is minimal,
> e.g. it's a 1 liner for Chrome:
>

Yes