Re: Call for Closure - HTTP response version

On Tue, 31 Dec 1996, David W. Morris wrote:

> On Tue, 31 Dec 1996, Alexei Kosut wrote:
> 
> > compatible server. In this scenario, it would be neccessary for
> > HTTP/1.1 servers to always use HTTP/1.1 in the response.
> 
> Another choice is to stop overloading a single value for two 
> purposes ...
>   1.  Declaring the servers capabilities
>   2.  Labeling the level of the response
> 
> A new optional header for example could advertise the server's
> capabilities and the status would be just that ... status describing
> this response.

Yes, that possibility was also in my message.

> The beauty of the extra header is that it would allow a response
> to a HTTP/1.x request to note that HTTP/2.x is also supported ...

Hmm. Isn't this where Upgrade: was intended to be used? Something like:

GET /something HTTP/1.1
Upgrade: HTTP/2.0

and then the server would respond with 2.0 if it supported it? That's
what section 14.41 of the HTTP/1.1 spec would seem to indicate.

-- 
________________________________________________________________________
Alexei Kosut <akosut@nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us>      The Apache HTTP Server
URL: http://www.nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us/~akosut/   http://www.apache.org/

Received on Tuesday, 31 December 1996 18:00:40 UTC