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

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

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 13:15:47 +1000
Cc: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <BE3B2E23-DEF4-44C9-A97D-17C2536D08F8@mnot.net>
To: Peter Occil <poccil14@gmail.com>
Makes sense; I recorded that in the ticket.

Thanks,


On 15/05/2013, at 11:17 AM, Peter Occil <poccil14@gmail.com> wrote:

> I suggest the following change, since otherwise it could be understood that the server may return the protocols in any
> order instead of in order of relative preference in a 101 response:
>  
> "A server MUST send an Upgrade header field in 101
> (Switching Protocols) responses to indicate which
> protocol(s) are being switched to, in order of relative preference,
> and MUST send it in 426 (Upgrade Required) responses [etc]."
>  
> --Peter

--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Friday, 17 May 2013 03:16:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:13 UTC