IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] It's annoying that one can't send push in 0.5RTT (#2227)

ianswett <notifications@github.com> Fri, 04 January 2019 08:40 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@github.com>
X-Original-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CA52130FBA for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Jan 2019 00:40:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.065
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.065 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.065, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=github.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 YJM9-V0HARbA for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Jan 2019 00:40:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-5.smtp.github.com (out-5.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BAE48130FB8 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Jan 2019 00:40:18 -0800 (PST)
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2019 00:40:18 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1546591218; bh=HfGtReHjm+130B2HQFbxkz4dv/U2e/JPuAPI4EySpv4=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=xgKTlfJhMM0OBjOLEL7cfCwvpLQOyzW7w4KEbwbgAmMnScRcxrpzKLuH8EYmca5L7 aXvkBMQJk8vFcc7gyLAetNQ6EpdRUEcjFFc8zNdOKYASe1ue7xLKWgGlJFVjONE/Vd oI25Xy32JdCxHUzP1MSIUylwHgm5wPB+hOreCzZQ=
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4abf97e5e120a87c7d218868eaa6ede67a41cab3a8792cf000000011846ddf292a169ce177070bb@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2227/451384724@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2227@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2227@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] It's annoying that one can't send push in 0.5RTT (#2227)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c2f1bf218d9f_4d8e3faa0c4d45b8326833"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: ianswett
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/KVazrl-llAhCX5wwAW3cPYSQu38>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <quic-issues.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic-issues/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic-issues@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2019 08:40:21 -0000

One question on: "Using the request as context is what made it possible to support push at all in cases where there are multiple users of the same connection (a common occurrence)."
I thought browsers don't pool connections from different users?  That seems sensible from a user-expectation and privacy perspective.

Proxies may, but they should really be providing some other user-isolation besides a push ID to ensure the response doesn't get pushed back to the wrong user.  Or they should only use push from the server to end user, which I suspect is actually what happens.

I'm not arguing for replacing the current push design with unbound push, but we should be willing to make changes to push in cases the original assumptions didn't turn out to be true.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2227#issuecomment-451384724

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email