Re: Title (and Identifier) for final and in-progress versions of HTTP version 2

On 11 December 2012 23:38, Roberto Peon <> wrote:
> Some kind of up-front version negotiation (thusfar NPN or
> Alternate-Protocol) has been sufficient for all versioning thusfar in SPDY.

This is useful information.  I'm not proposing that we close the door
entirely on forward compatibility features in-protocol, just that we
don't have a clear enough story yet.  I don't find "might want to make
progressive improvements" to be compelling enough to justify the
bit-expenditure.  For instance, new features that rely on new message
types could operate happily just using the extension points we
establish for message types.

Received on Wednesday, 12 December 2012 22:36:41 UTC