Re: Adoption call for draft-schwartz-httpbis-optimistic-upgrade

[Glenn Strauss <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 09:41:39AM -0800, Tommy Pauly wrote:
> Hello HTTP,
> 
> This email starts a working group adoption call for "Security Considerations for Optimistic Use of HTTP Upgrade”, draft-schwartz-httpbis-optimistic-upgrade. Notably, this updates RFC 9298 (connect-udp, which was produced by the MASQUE WG) on how to handle HTTP Upgrade, including to disallow optimistic data sending for HTTP/1.1.
> 
> The document can be found here:
> 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-schwartz-httpbis-optimistic-upgrade/
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-schwartz-httpbis-optimistic-upgrade-00.html
> 
> This adoption call will last for 3 weeks, until Tuesday, February 13. Please reply to this email with your reviews and comments, and whether or not you think HTTPBIS should adopt this draft.

The draft section 5.1 "HTTP" mentions token "HTTP/2.0".

Is there a published RFC -- not an expired draft -- which describes
handling of Upgrade: HTTP/2.0?  Are there any known implementations
(client or server) which support HTTP/1.1 Upgrade: HTTP/2.0?

There is a now-obsoleted h2c token for HTTP/1.1 upgrade of clear-text
(non-encrypted) HTTP/1.1 via HTTP/1.1 Upgrade: h2c, but h2c is
different from Upgrade: HTTP/2.0

Thank you for pointers to Upgrade: HTTP/2.0 specifications, besides a
brief mention of 'e.g., "2.0"' in RFC 9110 Section 18.10
Upgrade Token Registration.

Cheers, Glenn