Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

upgrade example shouldn't use HTTP/2.0 #112

Closed
reschke opened this issue Jun 29, 2018 · 6 comments · Fixed by #251
Closed

upgrade example shouldn't use HTTP/2.0 #112

reschke opened this issue Jun 29, 2018 · 6 comments · Fixed by #251
Assignees
@mnot
Labels
editorial h1-messaging has-proposal

Comments

@reschke
Copy link
Contributor

reschke commented Jun 29, 2018

...because that might be misleading given that HTTP/2 now exists.
@MikeBishop
Copy link
Contributor

Make it h2c. 😉

@royfielding
Copy link
Member

That is the mechanism and syntax for upgrading to h2 within an HTTP/1.1 connection, so I see no reason to change it. Whether it is h2 or h2c depends on TLS being underneath (and a twisted view of history). This is the kind of thing one might do over a local socket or localhost connection.

@MikeBishop
Copy link
Contributor

But the example as it stands is invalid (that isn't the token for HTTP/2), and 7540 doesn't define using Upgrade to reach h2, only h2c.

@mnot
Copy link
Member

mnot commented Jul 1, 2018

Yes, this should be changed; it will confuse some.

Suggest websocket since that's actually in use.

@mcmanus
Copy link

mcmanus commented Jul 1, 2018 via email

@royfielding
Copy link
Member

Personally, since you guys don't seem to understand that it is both a real world example and the correct token to use (in HTTP/1.1), I think it is useful as is. But if it really makes the h2 bubble happier, go ahead and change it to websocket. It is just an example.

@mnot mnot self-assigned this Sep 3, 2019
mnot added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 3, 2019
@mnot
Use 'websocket' instead of 'HTTP/2.0' in examples
8160102 
... to avoid confusion. Fixes #112.
@mnot mnot mentioned this issue Sep 3, 2019
Merged
@mnot mnot closed this as completed in #251 Sep 30, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@mnot mnot

Labels
editorial h1-messaging has-proposal
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

Use 'websocket' instead of 'HTTP/2.0' in examples httpwg/http-core
5 participants
@mnot @mcmanus @reschke @royfielding @MikeBishop