IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Invalid HTTP2 preface handling?

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Wed, 11 February 2015 07:52 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ietf.org@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 EE8261A8549 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 23:52:55 -0800 (PST)
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 Ukzto1Lv5zcR for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 23:52:54 -0800 (PST)
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 774701A0074 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 23:52:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1YLS3b-0002vu-48 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 07:49:59 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 07:49:59 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1YLS3b-0002vu-48@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1YLS3V-0002v9-IE for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 07:49:53 +0000
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.21]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1YLS3T-00017X-Sw for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 07:49:53 +0000
Received: from [192.168.2.175] ([93.217.119.132]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M2Glc-1XVxv00rjA-00s97o; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 08:49:10 +0100
Message-ID: <54DB0973.1080700@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 08:49:07 +0100
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Michael Sweet <msweet@apple.com>
CC: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
References: <CAH_y2NE5Sa625XEec5WXJ7LdjK+h1b4M=Fc-_iGj2ZQKa1q_jg@mail.gmail.com> <5C91DE2C-BC82-4142-B292-815EED3627EC@mnot.net> <54DAA3A4.8060608@treenet.co.nz> <CAH_y2NG0_Y9nnDjLd2Fc_5wBessfy0DOfKBfkH8NiKjyzAiRVg@mail.gmail.com> <54DABF12.70609@treenet.co.nz> <1467A259-E3B4-4249-BAC4-CC4D1BA1935D@apple.com> <CABkgnnUUNfHrX=KTp307F+war3nxNW6XDJGspeKCu3chDAZwBw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnUUNfHrX=KTp307F+war3nxNW6XDJGspeKCu3chDAZwBw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:SbJfmjok2CjGU9F/05emI6toBRC1rxA6DsVQ8eS/7AkQUeAKBGM NQOnKf/0uuwWp8F2lhENMWXlRyrjq7ul9KjAGK/KpG849udTHeOhCYIkjh6ewlre0pISvc9 eFcxKH+vgqqFxWpbzaCNY2MGBtcagKnPsp/UeJXa6OMvNucRDlEoonDbuqREDpKdCm8Nx1f 2OcAwDwD+tb7gNYbW7phw==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=212.227.17.21; envelope-from=julian.reschke@gmx.de; helo=mout.gmx.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.429, BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1YLS3T-00017X-Sw 857915274b1bfb099ccf28579293c8e6
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Invalid HTTP2 preface handling?
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/54DB0973.1080700@gmx.de>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/28815
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 2015-02-11 06:01, Martin Thomson wrote:
> On 11 February 2015 at 14:14, Michael Sweet <msweet@apple.com> wrote:
>> Um, with all due respect HTTP/1.1 is a Proposed Standard with a lot of years of deployment, while HTTP/2.0 is *almost* a Draft Standard.  Why are we talking about "a deprecated 1.x"?
>
> Well... We're headed for "Proposed Standard", which is the same status
> as HTTP/1.1, so from a process standpoint they will be on equal
> footing.  But there is no question that HTTP/1.1 is far more mature
> and interoperable.

Well, HTTP/2 integrates most of HTTP/1.1. It's basically just a new wire 
format.

> My interpretation is that 1.1 hasn't advanced to Draft or Full
> Standard is some combination of conservatism and a general
> unwillingness to do the necessary busywork, but I'm sure that Julian
> would have a more precise answer since I always tune out during those
> conversations.

RFC 2616 *was* a "draft" standard. That category has been removed, so 
the rewrite of the specs ended up as "proposed" again.

Once we're done with HTTP/2 + satellite specs, I'd vote for applying 
errata to RFC 723* and to move them to full standard.

> ...

Best regards, Julian

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status