Hi Aleks, On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 12:18:54PM +0200, Aleksandar Lazic wrote: > Hi Willy & other core devs/pms. > > I know that HTTP/2 is on the road-map but not ready yet. > > Would you be so kind and share some of your thoughts, stats and plans for > HTTP/2.
Well, the plan is to have *at least* HTTP/2 with the client and HTTP/1 with the server. Maybe we'll find that doing H2->H2 is easy enough but given our past experiences guessing that two sides are only slightly more difficult than a single one, I'd prefer to remain careful. Regarding the timing, I'm trying hard to get something for 1.7 next fall. But to be very honnest, 90% of my time spent on haproxy is spent chasing bugs these days, the last 10% are spent on code review. We've reached a level of complexity that is high enough to keep bug hunters busy and that's slowing us down. For the first time we even released a version with several known bugs that were not yet addressed by lack of time. So I'm trying to compose between fixing bugs and developing. I have some paper drafts about what to do, when I read the date on them I realize that time flies (2014 for some of them). A significant part of the internal architecture is ready (split between streams and sessions), some of it still needs to be done (make an applet able to use normal load balancing just like a regular client), we need to implement the H2<->H1 MUX which will itself work almost like a proxy with various states depending what side closes first etc. And then to address all the shortcomings that will result from this (eg: tcp-request contents having to be applied on the clear text only, etc). Also among the requirements we can count one which is that the applets are fixed regarding the issue we currently have with peers which can stall. H2 will have the same problem so we must ensure we find a correct fix for the peers before going full throttle the H2 way if we don't want to modify the architecture again. That's the most accurate vision I can give for the moment. Cheers, Willy
