Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] HTTP/3 priorities are too complex for a majority of implementations (#2739)

MikkelFJ <> Wed, 22 May 2019 10:46 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 247B9120121 for <>; Wed, 22 May 2019 03:46:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.606
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.606 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G0N1N9kc6LNs for <>; Wed, 22 May 2019 03:46:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 838BE12011A for <>; Wed, 22 May 2019 03:46:22 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 22 May 2019 03:46:21 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1558521981; bh=lnZ63SgtBO9yZe+69GpgR8FKHpzX9jSLPI47UyxkNss=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=xi6vUy34KURp7ijBn9LgCsimrmQ6CIWRlH76DrR5BcoYPH4hn20LKLuIGh6Gqap54 mW1oaIDD1rs3oQ+pMOQTi2yqBBGtJ2vtYiWTUdNaA8jk2tFLxNdtdOXnRp0bzeHj4r LxwpgTxzFyanvzU9yOrnlmK6B1n9nwR13fQiwWVc=
From: MikkelFJ <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2739/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] HTTP/3 priorities are too complex for a majority of implementations (#2739)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5ce5287d6eb9b_24673fd090acd9602137955"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: mikkelfj
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 May 2019 10:46:24 -0000

@LPardue actually I mixed two concepts in my question.

I'm asking generally, how much benefit does a priority tree provide over not having one, given that no-one bothers to support them in HTTP/2.

And second, perhaps it is not that important for performance sensitive websites because they use javascript to defer loading other javascript until first view images are loaded, and also to load more images when the user scrolls.

I'm not familiar  with Fetch/XHR. The lazy load techniques that I am referring to has to do with only making resources visible to the browser when needed by injecting script and image tags at opportune times and in an opportune order.

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: