issues
search
kazuho
/
draft-kazuho-httpbis-priority
Other
6
stars
4
forks
source link
issues
Newest
Newest
Most commented
Recently updated
Oldest
Least commented
Least recently updated
Can server send PRIORITY_UPDATE?
#121
dtikhonov
closed
4 years ago
2
Consider two frame type values to avoid wasting a byte
#120
ianswett
closed
4 years ago
5
response MUST NOT be affected by the Priority request header
#119
kazuho
opened
4 years ago
3
Remove outdated Considerations
#118
kazuho
closed
4 years ago
0
fix separators used in examples
#117
kazuho
closed
4 years ago
0
Ian's editorial comments
#116
ianswett
closed
4 years ago
0
add full description of frame fields
#115
LPardue
closed
4 years ago
0
Suggestions from #111
#114
ianswett
closed
4 years ago
1
considerations on caching behavior
#113
kazuho
closed
4 years ago
0
Replace priority scheme negotiation
#112
LPardue
closed
4 years ago
2
reorganize
#111
kazuho
closed
4 years ago
4
expand Security Considerations
#110
kazuho
closed
4 years ago
2
Clarify when PRIORITY_UPDATE can be sent
#109
ianswett
closed
4 years ago
2
Shorten urgency and progressive
#108
ianswett
closed
4 years ago
2
Add fairness guidance for HTTP/1.1
#107
c-taylor
closed
4 years ago
2
Add fairness guidance for HTTP/1.1
#106
c-taylor
closed
4 years ago
0
Describe the impact of priority on other connections
#105
ianswett
closed
4 years ago
3
Add a section on Extensible Priorities
#104
ianswett
closed
4 years ago
4
The header is end-to-end
#103
ianswett
closed
4 years ago
0
Unspecified handling of `urgency` values outside the defined range
#102
LPardue
closed
4 years ago
10
Shift urgency integer values up by one
#101
rmarx
closed
4 years ago
0
Rework negotiation to go back to simpler scheme
#100
rmarx
closed
4 years ago
0
Rewrite proxy-to-origin coalescing case
#99
rmarx
opened
4 years ago
5
Add guidance for HTTP/1.1
#98
rmarx
closed
4 years ago
6
Talk about caching issues stemming from HEADERS-based approach
#97
rmarx
closed
4 years ago
5
Shorten header field names
#96
rmarx
closed
4 years ago
7
Provide concrete guidance
#95
rmarx
opened
4 years ago
1
Mixing progressive and non-progressive
#94
c-taylor
closed
4 years ago
7
Better specification of Frame fields
#93
LPardue
closed
4 years ago
0
Priorities for low latency streaming
#92
rmarx
closed
4 years ago
4
Priorities for PUSH
#91
rmarx
closed
4 years ago
4
Consider use of Structured List to enable image acceleration
#90
kornelski
opened
4 years ago
9
Parameter capitalization + other guidance
#89
LPardue
closed
4 years ago
7
GREASE priority negotiation
#88
LPardue
closed
4 years ago
5
Explain why a client would send the priority header in HTTP 1.1
#87
ianswett
opened
4 years ago
4
Naming the scheme, and how the extensibility is going to be used
#86
kazuho
opened
4 years ago
11
Split tweaking
#85
LPardue
closed
4 years ago
5
result of spell checks
#84
kazuho
closed
4 years ago
0
update acks
#83
kazuho
closed
4 years ago
0
fix two typos
#82
LPardue
closed
4 years ago
1
Add formal scheme identifier names and IANA table
#81
LPardue
closed
4 years ago
1
Split prioritization into scheme and header sections
#80
ianswett
closed
4 years ago
5
hop-by-hop signals may cease once negotiation is complete but end-to-end should not
#79
kazuho
closed
4 years ago
0
Consider changing urgency range to 0-7
#78
rmarx
closed
4 years ago
3
Round-robin behind coalescing intermediaries is suboptimal
#77
rmarx
opened
4 years ago
5
"priority frames" is ambiguous, talk about hop-by-hop signals
#76
kazuho
closed
4 years ago
0
Specify how to handle duplicate priority schemes
#75
rmarx
closed
4 years ago
1
Update reprioritization example
#74
rmarx
closed
4 years ago
4
Expand motivation to include the choice for a simpler scheme
#73
rmarx
closed
4 years ago
1
place reprioritization section right after the header field section
#72
kazuho
closed
4 years ago
0
Next