Re: h2 use of Upgrade

Well, it is no skin of my back if upgrade is less well supported than a TLS
based negotiation.

The difference extends beyond settings when one considers extensions.
-=R


On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 4:22 PM, Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote:

> On Sep 3, 2014, at 3:37 PM, Roberto Peon wrote:
>
> > Not in the ALPN-based connectivity case, at least, implying different
> codepaths (and a required increase in verbosity near the start of the
> communication) for upgrade vs ALPN-based negotiation.
>
> That was already implied just by the use of Upgrade on an *existing*
> connection.  The client is already telling the server what settings
> it wants -- why does it need to repeat that in a painfully stupid
> factorial combination of protocol name tokens?
>
> ....Roy
>
>