APR:
Considering that before we know it, http/2.0 will
be here, and ignoring httpd for the time being,
what features/additions do we see as being needed
to support http/2.0 from an APR library level? How do
we compare w/ libuv, for example? How "event-aware"
should APR be, ala libevent?
HTTPD:
Fro
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 9:45 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> HTTPD:
> From the httpd point of view, what does serf
> provide for us to help us get to http/2.0?
How about a new mod_proxy_http2 which can go async like in
mod_proxy_wstunnel (trunk)?
Some code could then be moved to input/output filters.
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 11:10 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 9:45 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> HTTPD:
>> From the httpd point of view, what does serf
>> provide for us to help us get to http/2.0?
>
> How about a new mod_proxy_http2 which can go async like in
> mod_proxy_wstunnel
On 23 Sep 2014, at 9:45 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> APR:
> Considering that before we know it, http/2.0 will
> be here, and ignoring httpd for the time being,
> what features/additions do we see as being needed
> to support http/2.0 from an APR library level? How do
> we compare w/ libuv, for exam
httpd side:
serf to me is the wrong question.
http/2.0 in the simplest implementation is just another protocol to
httpd. We have the constructs to handle it, kinda. Improvements to
async support in various bits will help.
However our constructs about requests and connections (and their
pools)
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> APR:
> Considering that before we know it, http/2.0 will
> be here, and ignoring httpd for the time being,
> what features/additions do we see as being needed
> to support http/2.0 from an APR library level? How do
> we compare w/ libuv, for
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 05:26:38 -0700
Paul Querna wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Jim Jagielski
> wrote:
> > APR:
> > Considering that before we know it, http/2.0 will
> > be here, and ignoring httpd for the time being,
> > what features/additions do we see as being needed
> > to support
On 25 Sep 2014, at 2:13 PM, Paul Querna wrote:
> http/2.0 in the simplest implementation is just another protocol to
> httpd. We have the constructs to handle it, kinda. Improvements to
> async support in various bits will help.
>
> However our constructs about requests and connections (and th
