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

Re: reserved flags and extensions

From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2014 19:37:40 +0200
To: Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20140713173740.GY8438@1wt.eu>
On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 03:57:03PM +0300, Yoav Nir wrote:
> I think regardless of what we do, changing the framing of HTTP/2 will cause
> breakage by at least a subset of ?frame sniffers?, and therefore that is
> something we shouldn?t do.

It just depends whether we consider that they will exist and whether or
not we indicate them an easy fallback solution (eg: clearing a bit must
be possible even for hardware-assisted devices). Anyway, I'm mentionning
this since larger frames have been suggested several times as been
proposed later as an extension and I'm quite sure that at least without
minimal efforts like this it cannot be done at all.

> If we want a different framing, we should neg^H^H^H advertise it not in
> HTTP/2?s SETTINGS frame, but in ALPN/Upgrade and call it HTTP/3 or HTTP/2.1. 

The problem here is that it may quickly require a large number of versions
especially if multiple extensions are defined.

Received on Sunday, 13 July 2014 17:38:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 30 March 2016 09:57:09 UTC