- From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2013 11:14:33 -0800
- To: William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Received on Saturday, 14 December 2013 19:15:01 UTC
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 9:20 PM, William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org>wrote: > I don't know what the "do it in HTTP/2 itself" proposal is. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hoffman-httpbis-minimal-unauth-enc-01 > I thought > your proposal was advertising opportunistic encryption in DNS. That is orthogonal, and is *not* opportunistic encryption: it allows a browser to change the URI scheme from "http:" to "https:". > Anyhow, > we don't support any type of opportunistic encryption, especially > unauthenticated. We want people to use https://, therefore we more or > less only plan to support HTTP/2 for https:// URIs. Let me know if > this still leaves anything unclear. > That's completely clear. I disagree with your conclusion, and still want HTTP/2 to enable opportunistic encryption in a way that browsers and servers will deploy, but I'm not a browser vendor. --Paul Hoffman
Received on Saturday, 14 December 2013 19:15:01 UTC