Re: HTTP 2.0 in the clear and over TLS

[Fred Akalin <[e-mail]>]

Why would HTTP 2.0 be faster in the clear than over TLS?


On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 1:12 AM, Peter Lepeska <[e-mail]> wrote:

> HTTP 2.0 in the clear will be faster than over TLS. It will be interesting
> to see if Google will continue to trade speed for privacy when the standard
> supports a faster option.
>
> Peter
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 5:01 PM, William Chan (陈智昌) <[e-mail]
> > wrote:
>
>> Sorry, I am inexact. Some people may have previously said otherwise, but
>> currently to my knowledge no one is vocally opposing including a HTTP/2.0
>> in the clear mechanism in the spec, and the current draft spec does provide
>> such a mechanism.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 2:00 PM, William Chan (陈智昌) <
>> [e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>> No one has said otherwise. Please see the section in the spec where we
>>> provide a way to negotiate HTTP/2.0 in the clear via HTTP Upgrade:
>>> http://http2.github.io/http2-spec/#discover-http.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:37 AM, <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>  Hi,****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> HTTP2 must work in the clear and over TLS. This is required because
>>>> HTTP1.1 and HTTP2 must coexist to ease the migration to HTTP2, and to
>>>> accelerate HTTP2 deployments. ****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Regards****
>>>>
>>>> Emile****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> *De :* Michael Sweet [mailto:[e-mail] <[e-mail]>]
>>>> *Envoyé :* dimanche 28 juillet 2013 14:12
>>>> *À :* Eliot Lear
>>>> *Cc :* William Chan (陈智昌) ; Zhong Yu; HTTP Working Group
>>>> *Objet :* Re: HTTPS 2.0 without TLS extension?****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> ... and don't forgot some of the more obscure usage of HTTP, such as
>>>> HTTP over USB in the USB-IF's IPP USB Specification:****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>>     http://www.usb.org/developers/devclass_docs****
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ****
>>>>
>>>> There isn't much point in using TLS over USB (and a lot of cost issues
>>>> for that class of printer against it), and we need to continue to use the
>>>> same USB end points/interfaces, so upgrade remains an important feature of
>>>> HTTP/2.0 for me/Apple...****
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ****
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPad****
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2013-07-28, at 12:46 AM, Eliot Lear <[e-mail]> wrote:****
>>>>
>>>>  ** **
>>>>
>>>> On 7/23/13 7:34 PM, William Chan (陈智昌) wrote:****
>>>>
>>>>  FWIW, it seems reasonable to me to have the spec allow HTTPS 2.0
>>>> without TLS extension. If you want to Upgrade, be my guest. I have no plans
>>>> for my browser to support that, and I don't think Google servers will
>>>> support it either, because we care strongly about the advantages of
>>>> TLS-ALPN vs Upgrade.****
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not only that, I don't think we can reasonably call this HTTP 2.0 if we
>>>> have no path to do it in the clear.****
>>>>
>>>>  _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>>>>
>>>> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
>>>> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
>>>> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
>>>> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
>>>>
>>>> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
>>>> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
>>>> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
>>>> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
>>>> Thank you.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>