IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-16.txt> (Hypertext Transfer Protocol version 2) to Proposed Standard

Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au> Thu, 08 January 2015 01:50 UTC

Return-Path: <phluid61@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BA0C1AC3F1; Wed, 7 Jan 2015 17:50:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.027
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.027 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 0rKGK9AUMkX0; Wed, 7 Jan 2015 17:50:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qg0-x235.google.com (mail-qg0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::235]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D16FE1AC3F4; Wed, 7 Jan 2015 17:50:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qg0-f53.google.com with SMTP id l89so303591qgf.12; Wed, 07 Jan 2015 17:50:12 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=RFNYnL+tJECaWh+A9Hq6o6lxT4Feb4fwBC4N1UI+p4A=; b=OObbn6qtJYWcRg0LJkhw10309C8DQPgD/PBU/ybB7l9nH4W8r8u9EK/hLxECMEnPL4 2qBkdtZ/8nDrV+4v026rOa6HRehn/4JiEV0+Gp62NaX1xM5lP/75XyewkuT/dTcgWFp7 PDe0IzCdV6aG/w2LjkxNzopdD8ycqYE9iWIokeWkJVn86SM7nrC2/UQAO17anLDxZeXy vyfoAtd7Yj8GW3Vt8e0s/2xJ5jNifNNhXxoNcLAtNAvuWIj9HiWI1+p5dx758aWrf1+W 6UJMf7sAUORBcKi/RSwBPuv8QGGwjm3B0rC+tvxNZ37vLnfeh0ocjq6XZeAk3jyylLLL IqxQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.224.165.148 with SMTP id i20mr10026678qay.67.1420681812075; Wed, 07 Jan 2015 17:50:12 -0800 (PST)
Sender: phluid61@gmail.com
Received: by 10.140.93.98 with HTTP; Wed, 7 Jan 2015 17:50:11 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAH_y2NHo05XhmFtVfyRO4y840PMm2umpXpz==9OwTET+zVhDow@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20141231153045.2584.87794.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <5017.1420643900@critter.freebsd.dk> <CABP7RbeTbRgPvNHL__Y7CuwhXLdyovzQPmosc-R4Oe7O95wQuA@mail.gmail.com> <CAH_y2NHo05XhmFtVfyRO4y840PMm2umpXpz==9OwTET+zVhDow@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 11:50:11 +1000
X-Google-Sender-Auth: qUPKu9IoMu7wg20IK2absyxPB7Y
Message-ID: <CACweHNC_ErQawHEyzouti_j1yu2m6SnLuoj7FtaK9wm+3zYXQg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-16.txt> (Hypertext Transfer Protocol version 2) to Proposed Standard
From: Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au>
To: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e01295656bf6c27050c1a42e2"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/yXPvmyzrEr_adN2rOAWP4V28JuQ
Cc: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 01:50:16 -0000

On 8 January 2015 at 10:56, Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com> wrote
​ [heaps, which I will snip].

I agree pretty well with what Greg's written, and just want to add one
incidental outcome that may be considered a positive: by defining a
mechanism to allow HTTP/2 traffic to flow over the existing web, using
existing HTTP/1 ports (even if most browsers will only use HTTPS ports),
we've at least paved a way to allow other/future protocols to do the same.

I agree with James Snell's earlier sentiment as well, that HTTP/2 should
aim for Experimental, rather than Standards track. We've bought the upgrade
path (sorry, the ALPN-based TLS-as-an-opaque-tunnel path), so now we're
able to experiment with new/improved web protocols, and this is the first
such experiment.

Cheers
-- 
  Matthew Kerwin
  http://matthew.kerwin.net.au/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email