Just jumping in here, apologies if I don't have all context: > On 11 Jun 2020, at 11:38 pm, Magnus Westerlund via Datatracker > <nore...@ietf.org> wrote: > > First of all what is the intention of which HTTP version should be supported > here? And which protocol are the port 443 you are recommending, TCP, UDP or > SCTP? This also relates to HTTP/3 as it is getting close to being published, > we > can expect that in the future maybe people would like to upgrade to HTTP/3.
It's generally bad practice for an API to specify a version of HTTP. > Already now I am wondering if the written allow for HTTP/2 over TLS/TCP? Note, > that I am mostly commenting from the perspective if you want to be specific > that it is HTTP/1.1. over TLS/TCP that is the goal. Then this document should > make certain changes in the formulation. If you want to be unspecific and > don't > think that will hurt interoperability, then another formulation that the > current is also needed. I think what's desired is to say that the URL accessed must have a HTTPS scheme and a default port, not that communication happen over any specific wire format. > Likely also a discussion about how a client will figure > out what versions are supported. Why would it be different than any other use of HTTP? Cheers, -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ _______________________________________________ Captive-portals mailing list Captive-portals@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/captive-portals
