Hi, On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 4:46 PM, Xuelei Fan <xuelei....@oracle.com> wrote: > If H2 is not supported, SPDY/3.1 would be attempted, of SPDY/3.1 is not > supported HTTP/1.1 would be attempted.
Correct. > If H2 is supported in both side, > but H2 does not work, it is a H2 problem that need to be addressed in H2 > layer. If both client and server have "h2" as a potentially supported protocol, but the cipher to use h2 is not valid, then h2 is not supported for that particular connection. At that point, like you said above, spdy/3.1 is attempted, and so on. > No application protocol fallback in TLS layer if the application > protocol is supported. Your interpretation of "supported" is not what browser and server implementors mean :) > I understand your concerns now. I think we have different understanding > of the ALPN protocols. It's a good thing to understand the actually > requirements of the industry, I think. Thank you! So where does this leave us know ? By the way, while I have participated in the RFC 7540 discussions, and implemented HTTP/2 in Jetty to be interoperable with a variety of other clients and servers, feel free to ask clarifications to the RFC 7540 and RFC 7301 mailing lists, or even directly to the editors of those RFCs; they are typically open to answer questions, I guess especially so if they come from the OpenJDK team that is implementing those specification. Thanks ! -- Simone Bordet http://bordet.blogspot.com --- Finally, no matter how good the architecture and design are, to deliver bug-free software with optimal performance and reliability, the implementation technique must be flawless. Victoria Livschitz
