- From: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 22:08:43 +0000
- To: "Martin Thomson" <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net>, "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
so is the plan to identify the next protocol as "TLS" and use ALPN within the TLS handshake to identify the next layer after that? It would be great to re-use the identifiers, but it's not at all clear from the draft. Regards Adrien ------ Original Message ------ From: "Martin Thomson" <martin.thomson@gmail.com> To: "Adrien de Croy" <adrien@qbik.com> Cc: "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net>; "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> Sent: 22/01/2015 11:05:44 a.m. Subject: Re: New tunnel protocol >On 21 January 2015 at 14:01, Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com> wrote: >> one comment on this. It seems this header is intended to be used only >>when >> the next protocol is actually TLS, and the one after that is the one >>that is >> identified by this header. > >We've used ALPN to describe non-TLS protocols already: h2c. > >This is definitely usable outside of TLS.
Received on Wednesday, 21 January 2015 22:09:36 UTC