- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 20:23:41 +1100
- To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
- Cc: IETF HTTP WG <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 18 Feb 2014, at 8:52 pm, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> wrote: > Replying to myself, I'd like to make one point clear: > > It is ABSOLUTELY okay to use SRV so long as we accept that in some > circumstances there will be some performance degradation, and that we > will need to sort versioning beyond h2. That latter issue implies some > IN BAND upgrade mechanism for h2->hN. In the case of TLS, we might > simply handle this with ALPN, but someone from the TLS side should think > about this in the context of a fast restart. This is what�s concerned me in the past. We�ve made a lot of decisions based upon the assumption that introducing h3�hn (as well as other protocol identifiers) won�t require adding more round trips. Now, with ALPN, that may be OK, but it doesn�t help for non-TLS deployments, such as they are. Cheers, -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Thursday, 20 February 2014 09:24:10 UTC