Re: upgrade prose bug from Roy T. Fielding on 2014-09-30 (ietf-http-wg@w3.org from July to September 2014)

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 06:31:20 +0200
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Collins <robertc@robertcollins.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <7C666648-FFB8-40D8-8DA9-EE19005D1C75@gbiv.com>

> On Sep 29, 2014, at 7:35 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> robertc@robertcollins.net> wrote:
>> "Since the upgrade is only intended to apply to the immediate
>> connection, a client sending HTTP2-Settings MUST also send
>> HTTP2-Settings as a connection option in the Connection header field
>> to prevent it from being forwarded downstream."
>> 
>> Shouldn't that say upstream, with the idiom that client -> server is
>> upstream, server -> client is downstream?

Actually, downstream is correct, though Martin's change is fine because it is redundant here. Client to server is called inbound. Downstream is just the direction of sending.

BTW, why doesn't the h2 spec refer to or copy the section on conformance in HTTP/1.1?

....Roy

Received on Tuesday, 30 September 2014 04:32:00 UTC