- From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 21:22:15 +0200
- To: "HAYASHI, Tatsuya" <lef.mutualauth@gmail.com>
- Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 03:56:11AM +0900, HAYASHI, Tatsuya wrote: > Response inline. > > On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 11:01:15PM +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > >> In message <20120713225104.GK16256@1wt.eu>, Willy Tarreau writes: > >> > >> >Whatever will be retained as a basis for HTTP/2.0, this exercise is > >> >useful and may incite other users to provide very valuable feedback. > >> > >> I think it is premature, because it obscures and prevents the much > >> needed high-level design of HTTP/2.0. > >> > >> And that is exactly why I think the current approach and timeline > >> is a road to nowhere fast. > > > > On a personal taste, I find it fast too. 4 months to provide proposals > > to replace the 15-year old HTTP/1, and 4 others to review them is short > > in my opinion. Roy did not even have the time to publish the Waka spec > > which could have brought a lot of fuel to the discussion ! > > +1. > I think that it is an important point. > Should we make what is replaced with HTTP1? I'm not sure what you mean. > (Of course, compatibility is absolutely required.) Yes it is, but not necessarily on the wire. > Or is something added on HTTP1? We're not adding on top of HTTP1 but redesigning the on-wire protocol which is why it will not be called 1.x. Regards, Willy
Received on Saturday, 14 July 2012 19:22:41 UTC