On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Yann Ylavic <ylavic....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Stefan Eissing
> <stefan.eiss...@greenbytes.de> wrote:
>> Done in r1740075.
>>
>> I was thinking of a nicer solution, but that involved inventing new hooks
>> which seems not worth it.
>>
>> Since this area of protocol negotiation has already been talked about in
>> regard to TLS upgrades
>> and websockets, I do not want to invest in the current way of handling this
>> too much time.
>
> I really don't see why we couldn't upgrade to h2 from "http:" (not
> "https:" since ALPN did not take place already, or would have done
> it).
> ISTM that "Upgrade: h2" could be valid in response to a (plain) HTTP/1
> request, and the client could upgrade from there...
More on this and Michael's quote of RFC 7540 ("A server MUST ignore an
"h2" token...").
An HTTP/2 server must indeed ignore the inner HTTP/1 request's
"Upgrade: h2" header since it's RFC states it, but and HTTP/1 server
(AFAICT) is not concerned by this RFC, and should not...
>
> Regards,
> Yann.
>
> PS: feel free to ignore this message since that's already ruled :)
