IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com> Fri, 21 December 2018 00:48 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 DB472130EF9 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Dec 2018 16:48:55 -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 bfPndIm6qFtS for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Dec 2018 16:48:54 -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 12ED7130EEC for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Dec 2018 16:48:54 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2018 16:48:53 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1545353333; bh=pyhwAV9/uyM+AZhT0Ehp4QN4+JtBuJlvjQ8soMeLolM=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=Je2vJsCqhYqPcHtg9nhmdNWqbTcewrpiP3YZE6/F6BNHoTQ7dgga/wOVNsqmpQ3ZG jXtNt6SO/nmWu97mf6SiUrulQBdAh3i1NkX4zTJr0llVcOzRn/AaXXr1D9yICT4NHM Bdp6KaqERIWAbVhACjPJbHTFybycWk17L8V6xM7c=
From: Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab93ede57ba795720b81490dfe94a315b3bd67bc4a92cf000000011833fa7592a169ce177070bb@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2227/449191385@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_5c1c3875133f5_382c3fe3a84d45c413128"; 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/hygluXWhL9hTF5S1twps9DbR96Y>
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, 21 Dec 2018 00:48:56 -0000

While I understand the concern, I would prefer to not change the semantics of push at this point (especially considering the fact that the design comes from H2).

@ekr 
> Could we put a default in transport parameters or the like.

Looking at #436, it seems like we concluded to not? I remember myself arguing for exchanging HTTP-level settings using Transport Parameters, but people preferred the other way.

-- 
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-449191385

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email