Re: h2 implementation list -- PLEASE UPDATE
Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Thu, 02 April 2015 02:30 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@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 (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAC541A1AFF for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 19:30:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.912
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oZ5vi1Lx7x8g for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 19:30:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F0681A2119 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 19:30:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1YdUqY-0003zd-Ot for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2015 02:27:06 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2015 02:27:06 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1YdUqY-0003zd-Ot@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1YdUqW-0003yw-1M for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2015 02:27:04 +0000
Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net ([216.86.168.182]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1YdUqU-0005k0-Ux for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2015 02:27:03 +0000
Received: from [192.168.0.16] (unknown [120.149.147.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 250C322E200; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 22:26:38 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnXmtyt+r8Q-cJp2M+e8jnBc888pDXs6kd7N6bE-E1b2WQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2015 13:26:35 +1100
Cc: Max Bruce <max.bruce12@gmail.com>, HTTP <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <21C94472-23EE-4133-B4B5-7F772490E432@mnot.net>
References: <4AC59768-2519-4B95-86F3-43C19B4329E7@mnot.net> <D24E0668-56B7-4457-8E7C-DF7623AEF77B@mnot.net> <CABb0SYS+kTiCKHQUWfnVWV-DKfY6TVWm81UT1BE7xHAtg42E7g@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnXmtyt+r8Q-cJp2M+e8jnBc888pDXs6kd7N6bE-E1b2WQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.86.168.182; envelope-from=mnot@mnot.net; helo=mxout-07.mxes.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.3
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=0.353, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1YdUqU-0005k0-Ux 1577922af723b7d7f97542fe8bb78d76
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: h2 implementation list -- PLEASE UPDATE
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/21C94472-23EE-4133-B4B5-7F772490E432@mnot.net>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/29210
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>
Right. The most common values will be “h2” and “h2-14” (because 14 is the last implementation draft we nominated, and is what most implementations use today AFAICT). Cheers, > On 2 Apr 2015, at 1:15 pm, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 1 April 2015 at 18:58, Max Bruce <max.bruce12@gmail.com> wrote: >> Is draft 17 the final? I never found an actual finalized RFC. > > The RFC editor is working on -17. There will be no technical changes > between that and the final document. -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/
- h2 implementation list -- PLEASE UPDATE Mark Nottingham
- Re: h2 implementation list -- PLEASE UPDATE Mark Nottingham
- Re: h2 implementation list -- PLEASE UPDATE Max Bruce
- Re: h2 implementation list -- PLEASE UPDATE Martin Thomson
- Re: h2 implementation list -- PLEASE UPDATE Mark Nottingham
- Re: h2 implementation list -- PLEASE UPDATE Greg Wilkins
- Re: h2 implementation list -- PLEASE UPDATE Mark Nottingham