- From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 10:48:52 -0700
- To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Cc: Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CABP7RbdiW1h1Rj9rD=bVaFWFnFmmYjDEWPBbJZZvpJxL=gnRug@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 1:27 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>wrote: > In message < > CABaLYCv7U7iLBu5+8Nb9Wa1VeQguoMLJw4VOCbDBQK3WoE-sFg@mail.gmail.com> > , Mike Belshe writes: > > >> > * I don't think we need utf-8 encoded headers. Not sure how you'd > pass > >> them off to HTTP anyway? > > > >I just don't see any problem being solved by adding this? If there is no > >benefit, we should not do it, right? > > If this would solve any major problems inside a 20 year horizon, we > should do it. > > That being said, I am not a big fan of UTF8 in high-performance > protocol context: It is much slower to process than 8bit string > formats. > > This is precisely why I favor the introduction of a binary value option and the definition of highly-optimized binary encodings for the most commonly used protocol headers (like method, version, etc). Things like Host and Request URI need to be looked at tho. I suspect that, for a variety of reason, we'll want to keep limiting those values to ASCII only. (just because the value COULD be UTF-8, doesn't mean a specific header definition cannot limit the actual value to some reasonable subset). > UTF8 also gives rise to a number of interesting security aspects, > primarily where humans eyeball for security and don't detect minor > differences between glyphs, particularly in FQDNs, but I can't see > how we can do anything about that in HTTP/2.0. > > It's not obvious to me, that we can evade the UTF8 requirement, > so it might be worthwhile to consider what we can gain by embracing > it. > > For instance, could we get rid of the %-encoding of URIs by allowing UTF8 ? > It would be possible, for instance, to begin using IRI's directly without translating those to URI's first. Doing so, however, does not eliminate the need for %-encoding, and there are a range of possible issues that could make this problematic. - James > > -- > 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 Thursday, 2 August 2012 17:49:40 UTC