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

Re: HTTP/2.0 Magic

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 16:21:01 +1100
Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <641194C3-9EF5-4B67-BFB6-6605983ED6A0@mnot.net>
To: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
[ Now: https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/25 ]

On 01/02/2013, at 6:17 PM, Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote:

> Umm, sending high bit characters is far more likely to be ignored
> or trigger parsing bugs than simple ascii.
> 
> The best way to a quick and safe end (actually tested in
> practice 10 years ago) is to send something that looks like a method
> and ends with CRLF.  Hence, waka sends a 64bit value
> 
>   wakaVV<CRLF>
> 
> where the first V is the version being sent and the second V is the
> highest version accepted.  Both are a variant of base64 that starts
> at 0, so the beginning of each message is
> 
>  77 61 6b 61 30 30 0d 0a

I like the general approach. A few questions:

* Should it end with CRLFCRLF? Seems to me this _might_ fast fail on a few more implementations.

* Is the magic identifying the underlying framing layer in use (what we're now calling HTTP/2, but I suspect we might want to start calling it something else), the profile in use over it, or both? My sense is that both is perhaps best.

* Is the magic sent by a client upon connect, by a server upon connect, or both?

Cheers,


--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2013 05:21:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 February 2013 05:21:31 GMT