Re: HTTP 2.0 "Upgrade" flow

Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz> Wed, 17 April 2013 05:56 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4665421F97C1 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 22:56:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zfG5CJxKQJ+m for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 22:56:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EED9621F97C0 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 22:56:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1USLKx-00075o-Md for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 05:55:19 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 05:55:19 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1USLKx-00075o-Md@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <squid3@treenet.co.nz>) id 1USLKv-000754-J5 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 05:55:17 +0000
Received: from ip-58-28-153-233.static-xdsl.xnet.co.nz ([58.28.153.233] helo=treenet.co.nz) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <squid3@treenet.co.nz>) id 1USLKu-00045G-BK for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 05:55:17 +0000
Received: from [192.168.2.7] (103-9-43-128.flip.co.nz [103.9.43.128]) by treenet.co.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DE45E711D for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 17:54:49 +1200 (NZST)
Message-ID: <516E3926.7010402@treenet.co.nz>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 17:54:46 +1200
From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
References: <CAKRe7JGk2496QPTZ7POqZtA4e5Gb5zs3BfJMdKveYnrK+LDe3g@mail.gmail.com> <em352963fa-7040-4466-8bd5-5e480f58e35b@bombed> <CAP+FsNcrChWevfdwNgr0e=GH5xKqLYmTjRkffrdM+HvXFtwL+Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAP+FsNcrChWevfdwNgr0e=GH5xKqLYmTjRkffrdM+HvXFtwL+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=58.28.153.233; envelope-from=squid3@treenet.co.nz; helo=treenet.co.nz
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-3.449, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1USLKu-00045G-BK a6f90f951a5fa588a74618ecee27d62e
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: HTTP 2.0 "Upgrade" flow
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/516E3926.7010402@treenet.co.nz>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/17282
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

On 17/04/2013 5:18 p.m., Roberto Peon wrote:
> As proposed by Gabriel, SETTINGS (or equivalent) would/could be 
> carried in the headers in the UPGRADE request.
> However, this isn't enough by itself-- you still want to cause 
> transparent proxies to barf when you start speaking HTTP/2 if they're 
> not going to be able to handle it.

This is why the original proposal by Willy T. listed each of the HTTP/2 
"seeding" headers sent over HTTP/1.1 in the Upgrade request as a 
Connection header alongside Connection:Upgrade. So intermediaries would 
strip them away as well and break the Upgrade attempt cleanly.

Amos