- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 14:11:31 +1100
- To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org, Michael Sweet <msweet@apple.com>
On 18/11/2013, at 2:09 PM, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote: > Well, from what I've seen in this thread so far, only the idea of a new url scheme seems unpopular. The idea of having a dedicated port for plaintext http/2 has received several mentions of support. Nevertheless, the proposal was relevant to the conversation so I brought it up again. Definitely seems like positions haven't changed so I'll go ahead and not mention it again. Yep, a new port hasn't been ruled out, and there's been some interest in the past. Personally, I suspect that *if* we have a mechanism to direct a connection to anther host or port (whether that's Alt-Svc or something completely different), it might make sense to define a default port for it, to make firewalls' jobs easier. Cheers, -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Monday, 18 November 2013 03:11:53 UTC