Re: :scheme, was: consensus on :query ?

so that when a client sends the http2 equivalent of


to a proxy, we can do it.

------ Original Message ------
From: "Greg Wilkins" <>
To: "Matthew Kerwin" <>
Cc: "Adrien de Croy" <>; "Zhong Yu" 
<>; "Martin Thomson" <>; 
"HTTP Working Group" <>
Sent: 24/07/2014 4:35:26 p.m.
Subject: :scheme, was: consensus on :query ?

>While we are talking about decomposing the uri into it's component 
>why are we sending :scheme?
>It's not something that I would trust from a client anyway.
>If the connection is not TLS and the request says https, then I'm not 
>going to believe it.  The only way I'll upgrade a request to https is 
>with some secret handshake with my SSL offloader via a special 
>privileged port that will probably nail all requests to https 
>regardless of what the header says.
>If the connection is TLS and the scheme says http, then I guess that 
>tells me something... that it is not TLS end to end, but then I don't 
>know if I'm meant to be trusting the hop or the end to end.    It's 
>landing on my server as https... so I guess it is.
>Or is scheme meant to be optional, as in h1 allowing an absolute URL to 
>be sent in the request line?
>Greg Wilkins <>
> HTTP, SPDY, Websocket server and client that 
>  advice and support for jetty and cometd.

Received on Thursday, 24 July 2014 05:02:37 UTC