- From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 19:19:17 +0200
- To: "William Chan (?????????)" <willchan@chromium.org>
- Cc: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 10:16:25AM -0700, William Chan (?????????) wrote: > I think adding the relative preference semantic is good. > > I have to confess I was not aware of using Upgrade as a response header > outside of a 101 or 426 response. This indeed sounds very similar to > Alternate-Protocol. Is anyone actually using this in practice? I don't think so, since Upgrade really started to be used with WebSocket. However RFC2817 clearly mentions this possibility without speaking about ordering, just about combinations. Willy
Received on Tuesday, 23 April 2013 17:19:43 UTC