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

Upgrade status for impl draft 1

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 20:11:08 +1100
Message-Id: <B0FC9D1E-08EF-4275-9851-C8F33F24FF00@mnot.net>
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Based upon discussion both at the Interim and subsequently, this is where I think we are for the upgrade/negotiation process, at least in terms of the 1st implementation draft:

   - use NPN (or its replacement); uses OPAQUE TOKEN to negotiate
   - NO magic
   - SETTINGS first


  a. existing connection / new connection without context
      - Upgrade Dance; uses OPAQUE TOKEN to negotiate
      - NO magic
      - SETTINGS first

  b. new connection with context (e.g., because you used DNS hint, header hint, prior knowledge)
     - NO upgrade dance
     - Magic
     - SETTINGS first

The decision as to whether to use 2(a) or 2(b) in a particular situation is up to implementations, but of course we'll give (non-normative) guidance.

Does this make sense to everyone?


Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Thursday, 21 February 2013 09:11:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:10 UTC