W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: Adjusting our spec names

From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 11:28:13 +0200
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, "<ietf-http-wg@w3.org> Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20120401092813.GT14039@1wt.eu>
On Sun, Apr 01, 2012 at 09:06:48AM +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <20120401090052.GR14039@1wt.eu>, Willy Tarreau writes:
> >> One of the really big problems with HTTP/1.1 in that respect, is the
> >> lack of a session-concept, which people hack around with cookies.
> >> 
> >> HTTP/2.0 should have real sessions, so that HTTP-routers don't have
> >> to inspect and mangle cookies.
> >
> >[...]
> >I think it would be useful to have a TCP extension to transport such
> >application session information (that's out of the scope of this WG).
> I'm not sure I see how that would work, if a proxy of some kind
> connects to a server, there will be multiple sessions in the same
> TCP connection.

This is a good point, though if the info is sent along with the request
it's not necessarily a problem. Sort of an out-of-band session info. I'm
not saying this is trivial (otherwise we'd already have it), but it's
worth experimenting to avoid the current mess of deciphering SSL and
parsing L7 just to find the server.

Received on Sunday, 1 April 2012 09:28:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:13:59 UTC