Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify use of HTTP request with http scheme over HTTP/3 (#2439)
Lucas Pardue <notifications@github.com> Fri, 08 February 2019 16:44 UTC
Return-Path: <noreply@github.com>
X-Original-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77420130ED8 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Feb 2019 08:44:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=github.com
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 Fh6X1dNl2Dzb for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Feb 2019 08:44:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-4.smtp.github.com (out-4.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D81751292F1 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Feb 2019 08:44:41 -0800 (PST)
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2019 08:44:40 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1549644280; bh=Jv3t+Y689zUuPbmndKsod98k4FpyJcEf2OKPvet0Pg0=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=Ps3kP/TY2c3J+/s9oR86jN1RmrHTF+PJaV335wGjEpdat9P4yx8lAi15452HwaViq 11FkCAsaNfvZzpV1MJLYqnYzzCrcWn3UKXV9eJc5ecFVm6dEkz7xSmE44E6B8rYSeg 49HFVT8OF2xwYSoeDl1+Gaf8Im8taKy8XAE2FlCk=
From: Lucas Pardue <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4abb66b67b9c7bc1ad79a497a9882a23bb0ef50bfd292cf00000001187573f892a169ce1854ec6b@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2439/461866344@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2439@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2439@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify use of HTTP request with http scheme over HTTP/3 (#2439)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c5db1f886997_22543ffa67ad45c0198981"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: LPardue
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/RxdjfbsoXOPu2wAitYJO68hMJSI>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <quic-issues.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic-issues/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic-issues@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2019 16:44:57 -0000
I might propose this comes down to a discovery problem for the proxy. What method(s) do you envisage the proxy used to decide to make an HTTP/3 connection to the authorative server? This seems related to the discussion in HTTP WG - https://github.com/httpwg/http-core/issues/194 If Alt-Svc is being used, the flow might be that the proxy attempts to make a cleartext HTTP/1.1 connection to the authoritative server and does an upgrade, as described in RFC 7838, to HTTP/3. In which case I don't think any action is required. If the proxy wants to opportunistically upgrade via some happy eyeballs approach described on https://github.com/httpwg/http-core/issues/194, we might want to provide guidance that either 1) it shouldn't be done for client requests with http:// or 2) that it should always be done. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2439#issuecomment-461866344
- [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify use of HTTP request … Magnus Westerlund
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify use of HTTP requ… Lucas Pardue
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify use of HTTP requ… Mike Bishop
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify use of HTTP requ… Martin Thomson
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify use of HTTP requ… Mike Bishop
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify use of HTTP requ… Martin Thomson
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify use of HTTP requ… Mike Bishop
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify use of HTTP requ… Mike Bishop