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: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2013 09:02:10 -0800
Message-ID: <CABP7RbdwmU2+_e2YnBATBJXyW7TDwJac_46YFaT-qaDtZSr8Zw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
Cc: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
In such edge cases, the separate :scheme header can be used.

On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 7:56 AM, Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 9:43 AM, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Feb 1, 2013 1:50 AM, "Amos Jeffries" <squid3@treenet.co.nz> wrote:
> >> This makes several assumptions which are false and will cause a lot of
> >> trouble:
> >>  1) scheme of URI is always http(s)://.
> >
> > Yes, it does make this assumption. It seems, rather safe to me. What
> other
> > schemes do we need to support?
>
> I don't think that's a safe assumption at all.  I've heard of other
> schemes used in production systems (in enterprises, granted, but so
> what, the same might be useful in the Internet).
>
> Nico
> --
>
Received on Friday, 1 February 2013 17:02:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 1 February 2013 17:03:00 GMT