W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2010

Re: workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade

From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 09:57:59 +0000
To: "William A. Rowe Jr." <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>
Cc: "Eric J. Bowman" <eric@bisonsystems.net>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, hybi <hybi@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20101201095759.GI22787@shareable.org>
William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 11/30/2010 7:24 AM, Eric J. Bowman wrote:
> > Julian Reschke wrote:
> >>
> >> - Uprade to TLS is already defined (although not really used), and 
> >> changes the message framing
> > 
> > I was wondering about that; I've never come across it in the wild, is
> > there any data?
> 
> Not in a UI-client form that I'm aware of.  Various printer drivers apparently
> use this to negotiate secure tunnels to http-aware printers.

If we're including various devices, there are plenty which send
non-HTTP-compliant junk (with a passing resemblance to HTTP) over port
80, and parse their own non-HTTP-compliant junk at the other end.

I haven't seen any like that which are intended to work over the
internet, though.

-- Jamie
Received on Wednesday, 1 December 2010 09:58:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:33 GMT