Re: Adopting Alternative Services as a WG product

Sorry, operator error; forgot to run make :-/

Please see:
  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-httpbis-alt-svc-05

Cheers,


On 21 Mar 2014, at 10:42 am, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:

> In London, we agreed to use the Alternative Services approach to satisfy issue #349 (Load Asymmetry).
> 
> In subsequent discussion at the Design Team Meeting, it seemed like the most reasonable approach to doing this would be to publish the non-HTTP/2 specific parts in a separate draft, while keeping those parts specific to HTTP/2 in the main spec (in particular, the ALTSVC frame).
> 
> I've just submitted draft -04 of Alternative Services:
>  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-httpbis-alt-svc-04
> under consultation with Martin and Patrick.
> 
> In parallel, I've just made a pull request to add the HTTP/2-specific parts, with appropriate references:
>  https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/pull/439
> 
> As discussed, neither of these proposals contains language about HTTP:// over TLS or opportunistic encryption; that discussion is separate. 
> 
> Also as discussed, none of this places any requirement upon a recipient to do anything special for ALTSVC beyond not blowing up when it's encountered.
> 
> Please have a look at these and raise any concerns you have. The plan is to convert the draft to a WG document, and Julian has graciously agreed to take over its editorship.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> --
> Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
> 
> 
> 
> 

--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/

Received on Friday, 21 March 2014 06:46:19 UTC