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

Re: Call for Proposals re: #314 HTTP2 and http:// URIs on the "open" internet

From: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 22:25:24 -0800
Message-ID: <CAP+FsNfOgkOx=yKC3EJX_P2T5__Gw-if_m2rUHoEu0ZxEMkQ4A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ilari Liusvaara <ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi>
Cc: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Yup-- as Ilari says, every request is tagged with the scheme.

-=R


On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 10:21 PM, Ilari Liusvaara <
ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi> wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 07:06:59AM +0100, Eliot Lear wrote:
>
> > I'm a little concerned about backward compatibility with this approach.
> > There do exist many web sites that offer different content today on the
> > two ports.  Are you suggesting that they would become non-compliant?
>
> There is HTTP vs. HTTPS indication in the bytestream itself (:scheme,
> IIRC).
>
> Also, in some situations, the application protocols might not appreciate if
> client and server can't agree on HTTP vs. HTTPS...
>
> There's another problem tho. Many present websites don't like requests for
> HTTP URLs over TLS (I tested what one does[1]: It returns a default page
> with
> 200 status, Ouch).
>
>
> [1] That website is using PHP (FastCGI) on top of Apache (mod_ssl).
>
>
> -Ilari
>
Received on Wednesday, 20 November 2013 06:26:39 UTC

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