Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Developer Calls For HTTP 2.0 To Be Thrown Out

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Developer Calls For HTTP 2.0 To Be Thrown Out

    Phoronix: Developer Calls For HTTP 2.0 To Be Thrown Out

    Open-source developer Poul-Henning Kamp is pushing for the HTTP Working Group to toss out their current work on the HTTP 2.0 standard and to start over...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTcwMTA

  • #2
    Read the mailing list. One small detail stands out to me above all the others... If HTTP 3.0 is already being discussed before HTTP 2.0 is released... then they know there's some fatal flaws in 2.0 that are breaking in some way or another. 2.1 being discussed before 2.0 is released? Fine, thats "We need to get 2.0 out the door, but we know there's problems that still need to be hashed out." But W3C seems to follow the ideal of "Minor versions are updates. Major versions are breakage." Therefore they KNOW theres problems with 2.0 that can only be fixed by breakage.

    IF thats a KNOWN thing, who in their right mind will work their asses off to implement 2.0? Why not just wait for 3.0 this way you get 2.0 + fixes? SPDY is already being adopted by browsers and web servers so its not for that. Compression? Optional already. Encryption? HTTP 2.0, AFAIK, is still based off of SSL/TLS so there's nothing new on that front. Really, other than new defaults... what features of HTTP 2.0 exist that would demand it be implemented as fast as possible versus just waiting for 3.0?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Ericg View Post
      Read the mailing list. One small detail stands out to me above all the others... If HTTP 3.0 is already being discussed before HTTP 2.0 is released... then they know there's some fatal flaws in 2.0 that are breaking in some way or another. 2.1 being discussed before 2.0 is released? Fine, thats "We need to get 2.0 out the door, but we know there's problems that still need to be hashed out." But W3C seems to follow the ideal of "Minor versions are updates. Major versions are breakage." Therefore they KNOW theres problems with 2.0 that can only be fixed by breakage.

      IF thats a KNOWN thing, who in their right mind will work their asses off to implement 2.0? Why not just wait for 3.0 this way you get 2.0 + fixes? SPDY is already being adopted by browsers and web servers so its not for that. Compression? Optional already. Encryption? HTTP 2.0, AFAIK, is still based off of SSL/TLS so there's nothing new on that front. Really, other than new defaults... what features of HTTP 2.0 exist that would demand it be implemented as fast as possible versus just waiting for 3.0?
      I can just hear them saying "but... but... we worked so hard on it!"

      I agree with you. Ditch HTTP2, let SPDY and future versions thereof pick up the slack, and work on HTTP3 instead.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by EmbraceUnity View Post
        I can just hear them saying "but... but... we worked so hard on it!"

        I agree with you. Ditch HTTP2, let SPDY and future versions thereof pick up the slack, and work on HTTP3 instead.
        From my understanding HTTP2 is meant to be SPDY with bugfixes. But there seem to be issues you can not patch over, like header compression.

        If this compression is found to be attackable in the future, it would mean going back to HTTP1... So there are proposals to drop it, make it optional, use simpler compression etc. Or just start anew.

        Comment


        • #5
          Can we please just get rid of the w3c and replace it with something that is actually capable of designing proper standards rather than crap that then isn't actually a standard because it's a loose standard, and thus really just a crappy suggestion more than anything? Further any time they come up with a semi-decent standard (see XHTML2) they decide nah... let's not do that.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
            Can we please just get rid of the w3c and replace it with something that is actually capable of designing proper standards.
            And how do you expect to get people to follow these "proper standards?"

            It didn't work for Netscape and it didn't work for Microsoft. It apparently isn't working for Google either.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Ericg View Post
              Read the mailing list. One small detail stands out to me above all the others... If HTTP 3.0 is already being discussed before HTTP 2.0 is released... then they know there's some fatal flaws in 2.0 that are breaking in some way or another.
              This is what I got out of this announcement too. They should just skip over 2.0, otherwise by the time 3.0 is out, people aren't going to want to switch over to another version AGAIN.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
                Can we please just get rid of the w3c and replace it with something that is actually capable of designing proper standards rather than crap that then isn't actually a standard because it's a loose standard, and thus really just a crappy suggestion more than anything? Further any time they come up with a semi-decent standard (see XHTML2) they decide nah... let's not do that.
                They decided "nah... let's not do that" because it wasn't being received well. Same problem as with IPv6. When you don't provide an incremental migration path, you're setting yourself up for an uphill climb.

                Comment

                Working...
                X