- From: David Krauss <potswa@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 14:20:50 +0800
- To: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
- Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
On 2014–07–02, at 2:12 PM, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com> wrote: > Segments are not redundant with midstream headers. > Headers potentially have semantic meaning, even when 'empty’. There is no other difference. (I think I accounted for that, the last couple times I explained this.) If segments were gone, applications would simply use headers to express the same thing. Compatibility is not currently an issue. (Semantic complexity is an issue, but not in a good way. I don’t think the potential for application discrimination is a counterargument at all to Mark’s original question.) > For my part, I still see that END_SEGMENT or something similar provides for interesting characteristics for HTTP2->1 gateways in allowing chunks to be reproduced (and we know that there are issues there) as well as allowing the coalescing/tunneling of protocols such as WS onto the connection, making them more viable. Could the same be done with an empty midstream header set? It must be relayed by HTTP/2 intermediaries, but may be stripped when translating to HTTP/1.1.
Received on Wednesday, 2 July 2014 06:21:36 UTC