kazuho draft-kazuho-httpbis-priority issues

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Remove outdated Considerations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