- From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
- Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 11:14:41 +1300
- To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 15/03/2014 11:04 a.m., William Chan (ιζΊζ) wrote: > It's unfortunate, but I agree that given the interop issues, I don't think > we can require this. > > I haven't thought about it deeply, but perhaps we can opt-in using the > SETTINGS and HTTP2-Settings headers. Explicit server declaration of > support. I haven't gamed it out completely in my head yet as to whether or > not that would create other obstacles and whether or not it's better than > application specific knowledge (e.g. JS shipped from server to client). The issue is mainly (only?) in 2.0->1.0 gateways, and only in that one direction. Solving it in the 2.0<->2.0 or 1.x->2.0 cases does not seem to be any benefit. Amos
Received on Friday, 14 March 2014 22:15:08 UTC