- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 10:16:53 +0200
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2013-08-12 21:01, Martin Thomson wrote: > There's been something of a long thread on github about this topic, > that Will was unsuccessful in moving over here. Let me try again. > > https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/193 > > Julian summarized the issue quite cogently as: >> [...] HTTP/1.1 allows safe methods with payload, so if we decide that >> in HTTP/2.0 we want to allow PUSH for safe methods, we shouldn't >> rule out that they could have payloads. > > I'm just going to throw out the obvious counter argument here, namely: > > HTTP/2.0 doesn't allow push for safe methods, it allows push for safe > methods that do not have request bodies. > > And then we see what happens. Commence! Both are statements of fact. My point is that unless we have a very good reason to disallow something possible in HTTP/1.1, we shouldn't. If we do, people will find workarounds, such as pushing a base64 representation of the payload into a (probably ad-hoc) request header field. Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 13 August 2013 08:17:22 UTC