IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Why are there two ways of associating push with requests? (#3275)

Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com> Tue, 17 December 2019 07:42 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 9C83712096F for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 23:42:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.382
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.382 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.618, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 X20MEUGVO_BU for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 23:42:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-23.smtp.github.com (out-23.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.206]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1593A1200CC for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 23:42:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from github-lowworker-39b4a70.va3-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-39b4a70.va3-iad.github.net [10.48.16.66]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 636CB66098D for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 23:42:26 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1576568546; bh=oK/dy2J3OICTYlG3p7oIC++vE2oD4ummmjNJ07dd4L0=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=EGZWJ8YyzaF8eR4AMpWUC24VFWYB48BQumlLZuay6uMra9hbQOrLX9fhBTddatfTF mBVQYG0c2B0iUVh7GP+ajFULkIGi3yzBxv3gREF7eFp0JJ33aw9djo4v+pEgDFuUcz 722VF4ZO3Pzvq5juFghSWIson2EuwPJTaf8MvPm8=
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 23:42:26 -0800
From: Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK322UKOLRLEIKRITAN4AW4WFEVBNHHB7DC6LI@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3275/566422452@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3275@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3275@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Why are there two ways of associating push with requests? (#3275)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5df886e255662_11693fe9b08cd9602606c9"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: kazuho
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/LRPvx_uUTcYajG0XKQFyAXwYgzg>
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: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 07:42:29 -0000

@LPardue I mean that the set of headers should appear in the same order, and that each of the header fields should contain the same bytes (after decompression).

Or to paraphrase, they should be the same byte-by-byte once decompressed, rather than semantically being the same. For example, the number of white spaces between the cache-control directives cannot change.

-- 
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/3275#issuecomment-566422452

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email