W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2013

Re: HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS

From: 陈智昌 <willchan@chromium.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 14:00:05 -0700
Message-ID: <CAA4WUYhj0-h4MeL7pJC-gq_bZjnj7KHHUv5YQJGkf_7wGkyGFA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "emile.stephan@orange.com" <emile.stephan@orange.com>
Cc: Michael Sweet <msweet@apple.com>, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
No one has said otherwise. Please see the section in the spec where we
provide a way to negotiate HTTP/2.0 in the clear via HTTP Upgrade:
http://http2.github.io/http2-spec/#discover-http.


On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:37 AM, <emile.stephan@orange.com> wrote:

>  Hi,****
>
> ** **
>
> HTTP2 must work in the clear and over TLS. This is required because
> HTTP1.1 and HTTP2 must coexist to ease the migration to HTTP2, and to
> accelerate HTTP2 deployments. ****
>
> ** **
>
> Regards****
>
> Emile****
>
> ** **
>
> *De :* Michael Sweet [mailto:msweet@apple.com <msweet@apple.com>]
> *Envoyé :* dimanche 28 juillet 2013 14:12
> *À :* Eliot Lear
> *Cc :* William Chan (陈智昌) ; Zhong Yu; HTTP Working Group
> *Objet :* Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension?****
>
> ** **
>
> ... and don't forgot some of the more obscure usage of HTTP, such as HTTP
> over USB in the USB-IF's IPP USB Specification:****
>
> ** **
>
>     http://www.usb.org/developers/devclass_docs****
>
>
>
> ****
>
> There isn't much point in using TLS over USB (and a lot of cost issues for
> that class of printer against it), and we need to continue to use the same
> USB end points/interfaces, so upgrade remains an important feature of
> HTTP/2.0 for me/Apple...****
>
>
>
> ****
>
>
> Sent from my iPad****
>
>
> On 2013-07-28, at 12:46 AM, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> wrote:****
>
>  ** **
>
> On 7/23/13 7:34 PM, William Chan (陈智昌) wrote:****
>
>  FWIW, it seems reasonable to me to have the spec allow HTTPS 2.0 without
> TLS extension. If you want to Upgrade, be my guest. I have no plans for my
> browser to support that, and I don't think Google servers will support it
> either, because we care strongly about the advantages of TLS-ALPN vs
> Upgrade.****
>
>
> Not only that, I don't think we can reasonably call this HTTP 2.0 if we
> have no path to do it in the clear.****
>
>  _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
>
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
> Thank you.
>
>
Received on Monday, 29 July 2013 21:00:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:14 UTC