W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2014

Re: http/2 and "extensions"

From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 06:23:52 +0000
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
cc: Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au>, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <35058.1405491832@critter.freebsd.dk>
In message <CABkgnnXxXUqSmXzQ_2VE5==bSdutBVPZBOBWzctLrydY8AHJ9g@mail.gmail.com>, Martin Thomson w
>On 15 July 2014 14:46, Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au> wrote:
>> My feeling, coming from my encoded data thing, is that the more "real" the
>> extension (i.e. not just communicating nice-to-know metadata, but actually
>> doing something semantic), the more design and text is going to be dedicated
>> to dealing with unsupportive or broken peers.
>Which leads back to a preference for a new protocol label at that point.

What makes you think that broken proxies will not be broken in this aspect also ?

Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Wednesday, 16 July 2014 08:50:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 30 March 2016 09:57:09 UTC