W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2016

Re: Quick review for draft-svirid-websocket2-over-http2 (Was: Re: Draft HTTPbis Agenda For Seoul IETF 97)

From: Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 10:18:47 +0300 (EEST)
To: HTTP working group mailing list <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
CC: Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>, Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com>, Ilari Liusvaara <ilariliusvaara@welho.com>, Van Catha <vans554@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <20161020071849.33D2D135C6@welho-filter3.welho.com>

> In case of H2O, all schemes are handling equally at the protocol
> layer. In other words, whatever the :scheme is, the server is designed
> to wait for a request, and then send response.


Yes.

There is one exception however. When there is no :scheme and :method is
CONNECT.

But all :scheme:s are equal.  HTTP is used to connect to proxy
and that is HTTP request/response model. Proxy then translate
request to protocol indicated by :scheme.

> So if we are to start using the HTTP/2 framing layer to transmit
> websocket or other bi-directional communication, I think we should
> require negotiation using SETTINGS frame.

Yes, I suggested that also.  (There was many posts
about SETTINGS_WEBSOCKET_CAPABLE).

/ Kari Hurtta


https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-svirid-websocket2-over-http2-00#appendix-A

|   The author wishes to thank Kari hurtta for contributing the
|   handshake.
Received on Thursday, 20 October 2016 07:19:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 20 October 2016 07:19:24 UTC