Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-latest, 8.1.2.1 Request Header Fields | Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-latest, 5.5 Extending HTTP/2

[Yutaka Hirano <[e-mail]>]

I see.
Currently I would like to use SETTINGS frames to confirm the WS-over-HTTP/2
capability of a communication channel, like this.

An endpoint sends a SETTINGS frame with WS_CAPABLE once a HTTP/2 connection
is created.
An endpoint knows that an HTTP/2 connection is capable of WS_OVER_HTTP/2 if
it receives a SETTINGS frame with WS_CAPABLE.
A client knows that an HTTP/2 connection isn't capable of WS_OVER_HTTP/2 if
it receives a Websocket handshake response before receiving a SETTINGS
frame with WS_CAPABLE.
A server knows that an HTTP/2 connection isn't capable of WS_OVER_HTTP/2 if
it receives a Websocket handshake request before receiving a SETTINGS frame
with WS_CAPABLE.

Martin, does that look correct to you?

Thanks,



On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 2:08 AM, Martin Thomson <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> On 15 July 2014 23:33, Kari Hurtta <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > Should this
> >         "other than those defined in this document"
> >
> > to be
> >         "other than those defined in this document or extensions
> (Section 5.5)"
>
> We decided to forbid the use of colon-headers in extensions.
>
> > In other hand I think that this whole text
> >
> > » Header field names that start with a colon are only valid in the
> HTTP/2 context. These are not
> > » HTTP header fields. Endpoints MUST NOT generate header fields that
> start with a colon other
> > » than those defined in this document [or extensions (Section 5.5)]
> >
> > belong to
> >
> > 8.1.2 HTTP Header Fields
>
> Let's see:
> https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/commit/cf1677cbc2b8f501204de18ecfe6ff4be623b9ba
>