Re: h2 Connection Preface from Simpson, Robby (GE Energy Management) on 2014-09-11 (ietf-http-wg@w3.org from July to September 2014)

From: Simpson, Robby (GE Energy Management) <robby.simpson@ge.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 19:44:52 +0000
To: Lucas Pardue <Lucas.Pardue@bbc.co.uk>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
CC: RUELLAN Herve <Herve.Ruellan@crf.canon.fr>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D0377340.3A0B4%Robby.Simpson@GE.com>

On 9/10/14, 6:32 AM, "Lucas Pardue" <Lucas.Pardue@bbc.co.uk> wrote:

>Following the change made at
>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2013OctDec/0048.html) I
>agree with the intentions of having both; similar codepaths regardless of
>entry point, minimal HTTP2-Settings in the HTTP etc.
>
>The argument for similar codepaths would also answer Robby's concern #1.

How so?  From what I can tell, my concern #1 is the same regardless of
entry point.  It essentially comes down to the difference of all code
paths sending an empty SETTINGS frame when they wish to stick with the
defaults, or all code paths moving on (and saving the SETTINGS frame and
the corresponding ACK).

That said, I understand that changing it at this point may not be
desirable if we do not want to make "breaking" changes.

Received on Thursday, 11 September 2014 19:45:25 UTC