- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 09:39:45 -0800
- To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
- Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 5 December 2013 00:59, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote: > So how would the negotiation of the minor version be done? For which version(s)? For HTTP/1.x, the negotiation between HTTP/1.1 and HTTP/1.0 (and 0.9) uses rules already established. For HTTP/2.x, the negotiation between HTTP/2.0 and a hypothetical HTTP/2.1 would use ALPN and "h2" and maybe "h2.1". Any unique string would suffice. > I don’t see how that is done in HTTP/2.0 (except when upgrading from 1.1). Yes, HTTP/2.0 explicitly doesn't allow version negotiation "within" the protocol. We have ALPN and intend to use it ...and nothing else. > Maybe it is worth adding a section that explains the protocol evolution model of HTTP/2.0. Like this? Any new, incompatible version of HTTP will use a different identifier string. For instance, a hypothetical HTTP/2.1 might be identified by the string "DUCK".
Received on Thursday, 5 December 2013 17:40:13 UTC