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

Re: should tools like wget implement HTTP 2.0?

From: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2013 19:57:01 +0100 (CET)
To: bizzbyster@gmail.com
cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1311031947140.11171@tvnag.unkk.fr>
On Sun, 3 Nov 2013, bizzbyster@gmail.com wrote:

> Is there any reason why HTTP file transfer clients like curl and wget should 
> ever implement 2.0?

I can't speak for wget, but I'm the primary curl developer. We will certainly 
support HTTP2 and we're already in progress[1].

As has been mentioned already, these tools are used a lot like diagnostics 
tools and as command line versions of getting things done like a browser. When 
browsers do HTTP2, we need tools that can do HTTP2 as well.

when the "browser-web" moves to HTTP2, there's a big risk that the plain HTTP 
side of sites and services will be left behind and thus I find it very likely 
that in N years into the future, getting things with HTTP2 like the browsers 
do, will be more likely to succeed than asking for the same thing over old 
HTTP.

Finally, curl is actually built on libcurl which is a transfer library that 
works as a foundation to hundreds or thousands of applications and many of 
them will in fact benefit from the HTTP2 features much more than the curl 
command line tool will. Offering HTTP2 support for them is obvious to us.

[1] = http://curl.haxx.se/mail/lib-2013-09/0020.html

-- 

  / daniel.haxx.se
Received on Sunday, 3 November 2013 18:57:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:19 UTC