Re: HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS

HTTP 2.0 in the clear will be faster than over TLS. It will be interesting
to see if Google will continue to trade speed for privacy when the standard
supports a faster option.

Peter


On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 5:01 PM, William Chan (陈智昌)
<willchan@chromium.org>wrote:

> Sorry, I am inexact. Some people may have previously said otherwise, but
> currently to my knowledge no one is vocally opposing including a HTTP/2.0
> in the clear mechanism in the spec, and the current draft spec does provide
> such a mechanism.
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 2:00 PM, William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org
> > wrote:
>
>> No one has said otherwise. Please see the section in the spec where we
>> provide a way to negotiate HTTP/2.0 in the clear via HTTP Upgrade:
>> http://http2.github.io/http2-spec/#discover-http.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:37 AM, <emile.stephan@orange.com> wrote:
>>
>>>  Hi,****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> HTTP2 must work in the clear and over TLS. This is required because
>>> HTTP1.1 and HTTP2 must coexist to ease the migration to HTTP2, and to
>>> accelerate HTTP2 deployments. ****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Regards****
>>>
>>> Emile****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> *De :* Michael Sweet [mailto:msweet@apple.com <msweet@apple.com>]
>>> *Envoyé :* dimanche 28 juillet 2013 14:12
>>> *À :* Eliot Lear
>>> *Cc :* William Chan (陈智昌) ; Zhong Yu; HTTP Working Group
>>> *Objet :* Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension?****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> ... and don't forgot some of the more obscure usage of HTTP, such as
>>> HTTP over USB in the USB-IF's IPP USB Specification:****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>>     http://www.usb.org/developers/devclass_docs****
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ****
>>>
>>> There isn't much point in using TLS over USB (and a lot of cost issues
>>> for that class of printer against it), and we need to continue to use the
>>> same USB end points/interfaces, so upgrade remains an important feature of
>>> HTTP/2.0 for me/Apple...****
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ****
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad****
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2013-07-28, at 12:46 AM, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> wrote:****
>>>
>>>  ** **
>>>
>>> On 7/23/13 7:34 PM, William Chan (陈智昌) wrote:****
>>>
>>>  FWIW, it seems reasonable to me to have the spec allow HTTPS 2.0
>>> without TLS extension. If you want to Upgrade, be my guest. I have no plans
>>> for my browser to support that, and I don't think Google servers will
>>> support it either, because we care strongly about the advantages of
>>> TLS-ALPN vs Upgrade.****
>>>
>>>
>>> Not only that, I don't think we can reasonably call this HTTP 2.0 if we
>>> have no path to do it in the clear.****
>>>
>>>  _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>>>
>>> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
>>> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
>>> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
>>> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
>>>
>>> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
>>> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
>>> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
>>> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>>
>>
>