W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2015

Re: HTTP/2 Upgrade with content?

From: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 15:04:43 +0100 (CET)
To: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
cc: "Jason T. Greene" <jason.greene@redhat.com>, Stefan Eissing <stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de>, Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1503131457030.27951@tvnag.unkk.fr>
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015, Greg Wilkins wrote:

>> Why not attempt a PRI with the explicit http2 option?
> Yes that would be a lot better and we already support it in jetty.

Sure, curl will support that too soon but I think that is beside the point. In 
this case users can use this option on virtually any server without knowing 
whether it supports version 2 or not. Like Upgrade: is supposed to work!

> The issue with the curl usecase using upgrade is that all the upgrade work
> is essentially wasted effort - as the bulk upload is done with HTTP/1.1,

Yes, but... for example, what if that is the first operation out of several, 
and then once the first operation has updated to version 2 all the subsequent 
ones can continue using HTTP/2. And since the upgrade, it would just work with 
1.1 servers as we all as 2 servers without the client having to know 

And in the end, we usually allow curl to exercise every possible protocol 
option that is valid (and sometimes also a few that aren't valid) to allow 
people like readers of this list to test out and torture our own and others 


  / daniel.haxx.se
Received on Friday, 13 March 2015 14:05:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:36 UTC