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

Re: Title (and Identifier) for final and in-progress versions of HTTP version 2

From: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 15:10:05 -0800
Message-ID: <CAP+FsNe-7PDnZ7Rkgu+_qX+_X=vRMqtHHX0=bQu=E+hB4cSg6w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Cc: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
yup.
-=R


On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>wrote:

> On 11 December 2012 23:38, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Some kind of up-front version negotiation (thusfar NPN or
> > Alternate-Protocol) has been sufficient for all versioning thusfar in
> SPDY.
>
> This is useful information.  I'm not proposing that we close the door
> entirely on forward compatibility features in-protocol, just that we
> don't have a clear enough story yet.  I don't find "might want to make
> progressive improvements" to be compelling enough to justify the
> bit-expenditure.  For instance, new features that rely on new message
> types could operate happily just using the extension points we
> establish for message types.
>
Received on Wednesday, 12 December 2012 23:10:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 12 December 2012 23:10:36 GMT