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

Re: Clarification on HTTP/1.1 Server Response to HTTP/2 Client Connection Preface

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2014 11:34:28 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnUtzGPeAqeV-AbmncWUCmM5dTBX8QDnPQAB5y7jFcQvkw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lucas Pardue <Lucas.Pardue@bbc.co.uk>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 27 August 2014 10:29, Lucas Pardue <Lucas.Pardue@bbc.co.uk> wrote:
> I understand the connection preface has been crafted in order to provide
> robust handling of several use cases; such that a range of response codes
> may be valid dependent upon situation, however may it be useful to expand
> the paragraph in Section 3.5 to capture this succinctly?

Firstly, this is only an issue with cleartext.  ALPN is hard to get
wrong, and that's required when you use TLS.

The preface is crafted to ensure that servers drop the connection, or
at least fail spectacularly, rather than break in subtle ways.  If you
are building a server with code that has specific knowledge of HTTP/2,
it's probably better to do a little more work to send the connection
preface yourself and then presumably immediately send whatever we do
to resolve https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/496 [fallback to
HTTP/1.1]

Or, you could choose to fail spectacularly and hopefully trigger some
fallback logic.
Received on Wednesday, 27 August 2014 18:34:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 18 November 2019 18:02:01 UTC