- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 12:47:03 +0100
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2013-11-13 12:43, Mark Nottingham wrote: > > On 13 Nov 2013, at 7:03 pm, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > >>> 745 4) Requre secure underlying protocol for HTTP/2.0 (at least in web browsing) >>> 746 >>> 747 [ weaker for can't live with ] >> >> Are you saying that 4) == C), and that 4) was about using https only? > > In a nutshell, yes. I'm still confused. What you say implies that http: URIs will not use HTTP/2. We did *not* discuss this as option 4. Best regards, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 13 November 2013 11:47:36 UTC