- From: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 13:59:28 -0700
- To: William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAP+FsNf42nmF7NoFLpO60CRJO5avQbLni32mM63Gg7XDNrGg=g@mail.gmail.com>
I like the bones of this, but don't like that the frame size on stream 0 is different from the frame size on stream !0. It is missing descriptions of what happens at proxies (i.e. it should be hop-to-hop) ints should probably be described as unsigned ints the length of origin should be stated as length of payload - length of other fields, unless we follow the similar pattern elsewhere with other frames. -=R On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 1:33 PM, William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org>wrote: > I support this proposal. > > > On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 1:06 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>wrote: > >> On 2014-03-21 00:42, Mark Nottingham 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. >>> >> >> Stating the obvious: I support this proposal. >> >> Best regards, Julian >> >> >> >
Received on Tuesday, 25 March 2014 20:59:55 UTC