- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 08:30:53 +0000
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Roy Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
-------- In message <843A253B-27A6-474A-B0DD-55DE2D8CA988@mnot.net>, Mark Nottingham wri tes: >I was responding to your question about the 'architectural decision' >of a character set. Yes, and I'm asking why that that particular decision is out of bounds for HTTP/2.0, when we can kill other mis-uses of HTTP/1.1 without trouble ? How is restricting the charset in a way which is compatible with what the HTTP/1.1 spec says different from throwing out chunked boundaries in a way which is compatible with what HTTP/1.1 says ? Both a architectural decisions which means that some tiny subset of HTTP/1.1 traffic won't tunnel through HTTP/2.0. But one decision could be made with no trouble, the other is out of bounds ? Why ? -- 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 Thursday, 4 September 2014 08:31:17 UTC