W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2013

Re: p1: Receiving a higher minor HTTP version number

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 16:30:17 +1000
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <F1F0559C-B237-499C-96D9-32B9DDF8B1CF@mnot.net>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>

On 20/04/2013, at 4:29 PM, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote:

> On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 02:07:17PM +1000, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>> I don't see anything in p1 2.6 Protocol Versioning that explicitly says an
>> implementation ought to accept a message that has the same major version
>> number it implements, but a higher minor version number.
>> I think we need to spell this out, because IME some servers do error out on
>> (for example) a HTTP/1.2 request.
> Makes sense but I'm not sure that these implementations will change for
> this these days anyway, with 2.0 coming. Also we have seen with the
> 1.0->1.1 transition that the minor change was not that seemless (specifically
> due to persistent conns).

Yeah, if this is uncontroversial, I can see adding a sentence or two (maybe with a requirement); if not, it's probably not worth the time.


Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Saturday, 20 April 2013 06:30:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:12 UTC