Re: Invalid HTTP2 preface handling?

Um, with all due respect HTTP/1.1 is a Proposed Standard with a lot of years of deployment, while HTTP/2.0 is *almost* a Draft Standard.  Why are we talking about "a deprecated 1.x"?

> On Feb 10, 2015, at 9:31 PM, Amos Jeffries <> wrote:
> On 11/02/2015 2:27 p.m., Greg Wilkins wrote:
>> Amos,
>> that is a good way of doing it - more or less like an upgrade, but without
>> the complexity of having to inject the settings frame and HTTP/1 request
>> into the server.      While I hear what Mark says about caution, I really
>> don't see a great risk here and thus will look at supporting it also.
> I agree with Mark completely about the 2.0 -> 1.1 transition being
> dangerous. 1.1 has a scary amount of legacy tolerances and gaps where
> nastiness can squeeze through.
> Beyond safety is the other issue of promoting 2.0 at every opportunity
> while remaining compatible with a deprecated 1.x.
> Amos

Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair

Received on Wednesday, 11 February 2015 03:14:49 UTC