W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2012

Re: Mandatory encryption

From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:46:18 +0200
To: Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>
Cc: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@gmail.com>, grahame@healthintersections.com.au, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20120718154618.GB10943@1wt.eu>
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:07:19AM -0400, Patrick McManus wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-07-18 at 08:09 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 09:22:24PM -0400, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
> 
> > 
> > The issue with HTTP/2 will indeed be the same as with IPv6 : HTTP/2 will
> > be deployed between the browser and the load balancer, and everything
> > behind will remain HTTP/1 due to the added nuisances of deploying 2.0
> > everywhere.
> 
> Except we know that in the very near future SPDY adoption will have
> reached far more people than IPv6 ever has. So, unlike IPv6, there is a
> big demand to solve the problems it addresses.
> 
> >  Almost nobody does IPv6 between LB and server nowadays, it's
> > added cost for no benefit.
> > 
> 
> of course spdy has lots of benefits. key difference :)

Not between the LB and the server. It has benefits on the issues it
was designed to solve : the quality of the connection to the end user.

Regards,
Willy
Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2012 15:46:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 18 July 2012 15:46:53 GMT