W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2014

Reg spydy implementations

From: Appanasamy, Palanivelan <palanivelan.appanasamy@in.verizon.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 20:37:29 +0530
To: "'mnot@pobox.com'" <mnot@pobox.com>, "'ietf-http-wg@w3.org'" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <70AEAEC90FCAE0408586E94F491A07EC56EC3A31@MS-BAN-E7MB01.intl1.one.verizon.com>
Hi Mark,

Few queries on spydy.

1.We see spdy implementations in webservers as in twitter, google and facebook. All of these are http1.1+spdy3.1. With 1.1 implementations, are there any limitations we r living with that won't be there with http2.0 spydy? Or is it just as good as 2.0 spdy.

2. Are there usecases for non-encrypted spydy or spydy on port 80? Is there a webserver today that supports this?

Appreciate your responses.

Verizon labs, Bangalore.
Received on Wednesday, 12 February 2014 15:08:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:24 UTC