Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] HTTP/3 with strict priorities (#2700)

Dmitri Tikhonov <> Fri, 17 May 2019 15:16 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 155D6120403 for <>; Fri, 17 May 2019 08:16:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.009
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.009 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_32=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 IMD9pj4SZ0OP for <>; Fri, 17 May 2019 08:16:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 64E1F1203F0 for <>; Fri, 17 May 2019 08:16:48 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 17 May 2019 08:16:47 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1558106207; bh=/Lx3qyd32tEzNjn5XFzVKFAp4fWlEnL3FNo/Mg6drw4=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=X/gOAronNUMfqoF++KO072wtSe6Znz6Rdntd+jQhK2weVBw1RBWRlM+Um/HPqe/HO PynO0+eNJf5JAbdaP+TpHHFHLElmryw3GVfrRq1zkfe+W4s4iB/lk+GVsZxfAhuqM1 Sy8W1Ys651jV8oHdDT6EDTYFO/4+Sg7iK/5OWMdw=
From: Dmitri Tikhonov <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2700/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] HTTP/3 with strict priorities (#2700)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5cded05f8ab64_20f23faf8c6cd95c225279"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: dtikhonov
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: Fri, 17 May 2019 15:16:57 -0000

@kazuho writes:
> While I think this would be a simplification for HTTP/3, it would be an additional complexity for HTTP/2+HTTP/3 as a whole. At the moment, prioritization scheme of HTTP/3 allows implementations to reuse the logic of HTTP/2 prioritization (only what's visible on the wire is different).

This is an important aspect of this discussion.  Extant HTTP/2 stacks can use the current (ID-20) version of HTTP/3 prioritization with few changes.  Radical departures from it will inevitably result in more work for them -- not just in programming effort, but also to research how to use the new prioritization scheme effectively.

To be adopted, a new prioritization model should be substantially and demonstrably better than the current one. The proponents of new schemes should catalogue use cases (as @rmarx also mentions above) for comparison with the current scheme.

Recent reports (both in clients and servers) indicate that HTTP/2 prioritization is already being leveraged to produce substantial performance benefits.  It would be nice if these solutions could be used in HTTP/3 as well.

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