- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2014 07:57:43 +0000
- To: Cory Benfield <cory@lukasa.co.uk>
- cc: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
-------- In message <CAH_hAJHTe7NMKQLhwpUYLv1J3_M2w4FFtaN3gR4tAjJbPVauYg@mail.gmail.com> , Cory Benfield writes: >On 1 September 2014 01:53, Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com> wrote: >I think that if we make any of the (relatively substantial) changes >Roy is suggesting we'll want to go back and look really hard at the >division between the framing layer and the semantic layer. Yes please! >In principle HTTP/2 *could* be pushed out the door right now and the >world would not end. ... nor would it become a dramatically better place, or for that matter, a worse place if HTTP/2 only happened in one or two years time. >However, the WG should decide what it means to do this correctly. We >either slow HTTP/2 down to refine it or we accept that almost >immediately after getting it out the door we'll need to start looking >at 'fixing' it for HTTP/3. The fundamental problem is that against the sage advice from Frederick P. Brooks, the WG has taken the prototype and polished it a bit with the intent to ship it to customers on a rushed schedule. Given that we are working on a replacement for the worlds most popular protocol, that is not rational behaviour. -- 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 07:58:08 UTC