- From: Ryan Hamilton <rch@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2015 17:09:19 -0700
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Received on Thursday, 4 June 2015 00:09:48 UTC
I'd love to see an extension like this! On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 12:01 AM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > > > On 2 Jun 2015, at 2:13 am, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > On 31 May 2015 at 18:06, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > >> This is an interesting discussion to have in concert with #69 regarding > extensibility; if we make services containing unrecognised extensions > must-ignore, it would make this sort of thing much chattier; the above as > an after-the-fact extension would need to be this on the wire: > >> > >> Alt-Svc: h2=":443"; ma=3600, h2=":443"; ma=3600; persist > > > > Yep, but if we add it now, that concern is less of a problem because > > servers can send it will a reasonable expectation of it being > > understood. > > Absolutely. But, there's always the next extension… > > > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ > > >
Received on Thursday, 4 June 2015 00:09:48 UTC