- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 15:02:22 +1000
- To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
<https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/537> On 1 Jul 2014, at 4:40 am, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote: > On 30 June 2014 11:23, David Krauss <potswa@gmail.com> wrote: >>> That's an argument for the new application negotiation token. >> >> Such a proxy should only be put in a place where no negotiation is necessary. Bailing out at any END_SEGMENT would be acceptable then. > > There's an obvious counterargument to that one... > > That's fine, but if you want to operate sans-standard, then you can > add your own END_SEGMENT. > > I really don't care either way here. I'm just enumerating the > options, and noting that what is currently specified isn't > particularly well-supported. Our responsibility is to either more > clearly define it, or remove it. Agreed. It sounds like we're leaning towards removing it - can people live with that? -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 2 July 2014 05:02:54 UTC