- From: 陈智昌 <willchan@chromium.org>
- Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2013 16:35:39 -0700
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAA4WUYgA+TyUBi7wktnJX+Gts7=1tDgMUdbzkTcf=8vwaO1jZQ@mail.gmail.com>
This is fine for now, but FYI I consider this a blocker for Chromium to switch entirely to HTTP/2.0. I note that this is an existing HTTP feature that clients use to tunnel over HTTP proxies. As far as its use in SPDY, it's not merely theoretical, but has a number of actual uses: * http://spdylay.sourceforge.net/package_README.html#shrpx-a-reverse-proxy-for-spdy-https * https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/breakwall-vpn-spdy-proxy/higommoegggcanmkapeoohipckeofpnd(3000~ installs) * https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/spdy-proxy/hhihiednomfhmngipmplmgcngliajdnn(4000~ installs) * Corporate google.com VPN extension (not public) (widely used by Googlers) I believe these uses demonstrate that this is a desired use case to support. As noted, it is fairly straightforward to define a mapping of HTTP CONNECT over HTTP/2.0. Please see: http://www.chromium.org/spdy/spdy-proxy-examples and http://www.chromium.org/spdy/spdy-proxy. On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 10:30 AM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>wrote: > Folks might notice that I've added a section on CONNECT to HTTP/2.0: > > http://http2.github.io/http2-spec/index.html#rfc.section.8.3 > > This doesn't close #230, it simply documents status quo. If we decide > to support CONNECT, the draft will, of course, be updated to reflect > that decision. This is fairly straightforward based on the Chromium > documentation and the discussion thus far, we just need to decide if > it's valuable enough to do. > >
Received on Saturday, 31 August 2013 23:36:06 UTC