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

Re: Do we kill the "Host:" header in HTTP/2 ?

From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 23:23:12 +0000
To: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
cc: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>, "Adrien W. de Croy" <adrien@qbik.com>, Eliezer Croitoru <eliezer@ngtech.co.il>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
Message-ID: <18340.1359588192@critter.freebsd.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
--------
In message <CAP+FsNchuV1V2+deWTwRBC5RkmzV29QjKAM1z+pWVYZaorYUyg@mail.gmail.com>, Roberto Peon writes:

>I'm not sure I understand the part where you say that you'd have to
>text-process the entire headers to find the fqdn. 

(In HTTP/1.1 you need to find the Host: header, it can be anywere,
any number of times, including 0 times.)

>Sending the components of the URI separately reduces the need to parse
>these things, and better, since most of the time the host won't have
>changed, a simple single 'if' allows us to proceed with the fqdn of the
>previous request without any parsing at all.

That's slightly different question IMO.

The question I'm asking, is this:

	Are we going to have both a "URI" and a "Host:" field ?

	The issue here is: What if neither or both have FQDN's,
	what if they disagree and all that jazz...

You question is more like:

	Are we going to transmit URI and FQDN separately ?

to which my counter question is:  Which "FQDN" would that be, the
one from the absolute URI ?  Or the one from the Host: header ?

It seems to me that the sanest decision is:  "All URIs MUST
be absolute, but we might preparse them and transmit the
fqdn separately for reasons of effciency, and we have no
dedicated Host: header in HTTP/2.0"





-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Wednesday, 30 January 2013 23:23:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 30 January 2013 23:23:40 GMT