Re: Call for Proposals re: #314 HTTP2 and http:// URIs on the "open" internet

In message <>, Willy Tarreau writes:
>On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 04:08:49AM +0000, Adrien de Croy wrote:
>> my 2c is that http/2.0 (TLS or not) is enough of a departure from http, 
>> that trying to put plaintext http/2.0 over port 80 will just be an 
>> impossible nightmare.
>Changing the port will require to change the scheme as well otherwise
>it will end up being even worse. For example, *right now* over the net
>and even much more in corporate networks, you have many applications
>running on non-80 ports. So when the browser will have to connect to
>"", what version will it use ?

Long time ago I argued that we should look into "no-RTT upgrade", ie
a scheme where the first byte sent from client to server on HTTP/2
would allow the server to decide which protocol it was.

Together with an "Also:" or alt-svc header which announces which
protocols are supported by the server, this could work seamlessly:

	if port == 100
	elif we've seen Also: header announcing http/2

This idea may be worth revisiting.

Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

Received on Wednesday, 20 November 2013 08:24:00 UTC