- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2014 05:52:27 +0000
- To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
- cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
-------- In message <91C83850-A992-4655-8AD5-CDC59794156B@gbiv.com>, "Roy T. Fielding" w rites: >This comment is in reference to section 3.2 of >> A server MUST ignore a "h2" token in an Upgrade header field. >> Presence of a token with "h2" implies HTTP/2 over TLS, which is >> instead negotiated as described in Section 3.3. > >There is no such token. ALPN tokens have nothing to do with Upgrade >and this is an HTTP/1.1 request, so this spec has no ability to make >such an (unnecessary) requirement. Roy, You lack the background here: Of the major browsers, only Microsoft has indicated that they are going to support HTTP/2 without TLS. Three or maybe four others have said rather categorically that they are only going to implement HTTP/2 with TLS. This has made non-TLS HTTP/2 a stepchild in the WG, and a lot of assumptions and decisions, stated or unstated, are based on this "TLS-only" world-view. One particular place where this has been evident, is that it has been impossible to get a frame-layer and frame-layout optimized for high-performance load-balancing and hardware implementations. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Monday, 1 September 2014 05:52:52 UTC