- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 09:15:15 -0800
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, IETF HTTP WG <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 20 February 2014 01:23, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > This is what’s concerned me in the past. We’ve made a lot of decisions based upon the assumption that introducing h3…hn (as well as other protocol identifiers) won’t require adding more round trips. In the general case, I don't think that this is a concern. There is an expectation that somewhere you are able to select between nothing (i.e. HTTP/1.1) and "h2". As long as that is general enough, selecting "h3" instead should be no concern. ALPN does that trivially. That doesn't mean that it can't be screwed up somehow. Anything that was serialized somehow (nothing -> h2 -> h3 -> h4 ...) would be an issue, but then that's also an issue for HTTP/2, because it puts HTTP/2 at a disadvantage. I'm confident that, once we are aware of this constraint (which may happen in time), we won't allow a solution that doesn't have such undesirable properties.
Received on Thursday, 20 February 2014 17:15:43 UTC