- From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
- Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2025 13:13:00 +1300
- To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 04/10/2025 10:33, Lucas Pardue wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for the proposal. While the use case(s) might seem niche, I think > there are enough avenues that could benefit from such an extension. > > HTTP/3 framing, while powerful, is a common impediment to more optimized > data paths that HTTP/1.1 can leverage. > > The use cases described such as CONNECT streams are "odd" in HTTP terms > anyway and already don't allow for things like trailers. This extension > spells that existing reality in a different way. > > In some ways, this reminds me of proxy protocol v2 [1]. A binary format > for header containing some useful info, before switching into full byte > streaming mode. > So all the HTTP/2 work to fix unbound-data completion-vs-termination issues. Then HTTP/3 to migrate to UDP/QUIC. Only to revert to essentially HTTP 0.9/1.0 messaging semantics over QUIC. IMHO code that is new enough to properly wrap a octet sequence in QUIC syntax (for the 'unbounded' delivery), is better off wrapping it as normal HTTP DATA instead. Cheers Amos
Received on Saturday, 4 October 2025 00:13:08 UTC