Re: SPDY Header Frames

In message <>, Willy Tarreau writes:

>If you're talking about Roberto's mail, I read quite the opposite in
>fact. It was said that Google was open to have anything provided that
>the concepts raised in SPDY were preserved. 

Well, which way is it Roberto ?

Care to clarify ?

>I have talked long hours with the SPDY team at IETF83. [...] They
>clearly said they were open to changes. What else do you want ?

I want a sensible and ethical engineering process, one that doesn't
dive headlong into serialization of HTTP headers until we have
established what problems HTTP/2.0 should solve.

Sneaking things like server-push through the backdoor is simply not
acceptable, without structured decision to give up on HTTP's strict
request-response model.

It may be that we want to loose the strict R-R model, it may be
that we do not.

But making the HTTP/2.0 process a matter of "who already has a ready
ID" is not the way to decide a question like that.

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 Saturday, 14 July 2012 06:42:34 UTC