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: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 08:28:26 +0100
To: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
Cc: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20131120072826.GH22150@1wt.eu>
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 04:08:49AM +0000, Adrien de Croy wrote:
> 
> my 2c is that http/2.0 (TLS or not) is enough of a departure from http, 
> that trying to put plaintext http/2.0 over port 80 will just be an 
> impossible nightmare.

Changing the port will require to change the scheme as well otherwise
it will end up being even worse. For example, *right now* over the net
and even much more in corporate networks, you have many applications
running on non-80 ports. So when the browser will have to connect to
"http://foo.bar.tld:8080/", what version will it use ? We could decide
that it will only use HTTP/1 but then we'll have a hard time migrating
everything to 2.0, especially considering that developers are the
primary users of random ports which allow them to put a lot of stuff
and versions on the same development server. So anyway even if we use
another port, we'll need the protocols to be distinguishable from 1.x,
going back to the HTTP Upgrade again. So then a new port will not bring
any benefit (well, just more transparency for now) and will cause other
issues (blocked ports).

Willy
Received on Wednesday, 20 November 2013 07:28:58 UTC

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