Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] Transport owns details of effecting keep-alive (#2324)

From: Mike Bishop <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2019 18:45:57 +0000 (UTC)

Fixes #2092.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2324

-- Commit Summary --

  * Transport owns details of effecting keep-alive

-- File Changes --

    M draft-ietf-quic-http.md (15)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2324.patch
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2324.diff

-- 
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/pull/2324

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2019 15:19:19 -0800

martinthomson commented on this pull request.

> @@ -1202,13 +1202,14 @@ will need to open a new connection for new requests if the existing connection
 has been idle for longer than the server's advertised idle timeout, and SHOULD
 do so if approaching the idle timeout.
 
-HTTP clients are expected to use QUIC PING frames to keep connections open while
-there are responses outstanding for requests or server pushes. If the client is
-not expecting a response from the server, allowing an idle connection to time
-out is preferred over expending effort maintaining a connection that might not
-be needed.  A gateway MAY use PING to maintain connections in anticipation of
-need rather than incur the latency cost of connection establishment to servers.
-Servers SHOULD NOT use PING frames to keep a connection open.
+HTTP clients are expected to request that the transport keep connections open
+while there are responses outstanding for requests or server pushes.  This might
+involve QUIC PING frames being generated by the transport implementation. If the

Do you want to cite Section 19.2 of transport here?  That might be better than this "This might involve" sentence, which strikes me as very passive.

-- 
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/pull/2324#pullrequestreview-190985803

---

From: Mike Bishop <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2019 15:25:10 -0800

@MikeBishop pushed 1 commit.

8644e87efcdaa2ff7d290f637619dbd9576051b9  Punt more to the transport doc

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2324/files/b4ade009100b336ffb2abc185827e89635a904bc..8644e87efcdaa2ff7d290f637619dbd9576051b9

---

From: Mike Bishop <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2019 15:26:33 -0800

MikeBishop commented on this pull request.

My main thought in the passive phrasing is that the transport will know whether activity on other streams makes a PING necessary or not at any given time.  But I agree, a ref to 19.2 in transport is probably the easiest way to punt appropriately.

-- 
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/pull/2324#discussion_r246585014

---

From: ianswett <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2019 08:53:44 -0800

ianswett approved this pull request.

-- 
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/pull/2324#pullrequestreview-191309172

---

From: Mike Bishop <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2019 10:48:47 -0800

Merged #2324 into master.

-- 
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/pull/2324#event-2066687360