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

Re: p1: Upgrade ordering (possible HTTP/2 impact)

From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 07:43:30 +0200
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20130430054330.GB21517@1wt.eu>
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 01:20:14PM +1000, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> I'm going to mark this resoution for incorporation into -23.

OK, then fixing a typo in my own text below :

  The "Upgrade" header field is intended to provide a simple mechanism
  for transitioning from HTTP/1.1 to some other protocol on the same
  connection.  A client MAY send a list of protocols in order of relative
  preference in the Upgrade header field of a request to invite the server
  to switch to one or more of those protocols before sending the final
  response.  A server MUST send an Upgrade header field in 101 (Switching
  Protocols) responses to indicate which protocol(s) are being switched
  to, and MUST send it in 426 (Upgrade Required) responses to indicate
  acceptable protocols in order of relative preference.  A server MAY
  send an Upgrade header field in any other response to indicate that
- they might be willing to upgrade to one of the specified protocols for
+ it might be willing to upgrade to one of the specified protocols for
  a future request, in order of relative preference.

Willy
Received on Tuesday, 30 April 2013 05:43:55 UTC

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