- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 14:27:06 -0700
- To: William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org>
- Cc: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, Ryan Hamilton <rch@google.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 24 September 2013 11:02, William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org> wrote: > Sorry for the delay. https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/pull/249. That's OK, I was on vacation (that is, closer to 100% of the time than yours). I've accepted the pull request, but I think that there are a few things to resolve. 1. The :host header. I'm not comfortable with the MAY on this. Given that this is 100% new functionality, I think that we need better justification than the fact that some HTTP/1.x (or even 0.9) clients set different values for the target URI and Host header. Just because they did something wrong, it doesn't mean that we have to. Requiring the omission of :host doesn't lose anything, ... unless existing proxies are doing something special based on its value. 2. I need to find some way to incorporate the comments that Ilari made here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2013JulSep/1036.html (Not including the suggestion to fix the scheme to "tcp", even though it's a very interesting idea. But that opens up a whole new can of extensibility worms that I'd rather leave closed.) We also need to say that implementations are obligated to send END_STREAM as soon as possible if they see END_STREAM, otherwise we violate assumptions in TCP. Those more familiar with TCP can correct me here if I've misinterpreted RFC 793 or am ignorant of actual behaviour.
Received on Thursday, 3 October 2013 21:27:33 UTC