Skip to content

http2: RFC8441 extended connect protocol #1

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.

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

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

aojea
Copy link
Owner

@aojea aojea commented Dec 22, 2021

Support the Extended Connect Protocol defined by RFC 8441.

  • Add a new pseudoheader :protocol
  • New HTTP2 Server option "EnableConnectProtocol" to enable
    the HTTP2 ENABLE_CONNECT_PROTOCOL setting.
  • HTTP Request field "Proto", that was ignored from Clients, now
    is used for setting the field ":protocol" on Connect requests

Change-Id: I1e4bf6a45bd667fa5e5388678bee0feac64641c1

Support the Extended Connect Protocol defined by RFC 8441.

- Add a new pseudoheader :protocol
- New HTTP2 Server option "EnableConnectProtocol" to enable
the HTTP2 ENABLE_CONNECT_PROTOCOL setting.
- HTTP Request field "Proto", that was ignored from Clients, now
is used for setting the field ":protocol" on Connect requests

Change-Id: I1e4bf6a45bd667fa5e5388678bee0feac64641c1
f(":path", path)
f(":scheme", req.URL.Scheme)
if isExtendedConnect {
f(":protocol", req.Proto)
Copy link
Owner Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I didn't find a good way to plumb down the protocol field, maybe adding a new semantic to the current protocol field? it seems is unused right now for clients

	// The protocol version for incoming server requests.
	//
	// For client requests, these fields are ignored. The HTTP
	// client code always uses either HTTP/1.1 or HTTP/2.
	// See the docs on Transport for details.
	Proto      string // "HTTP/1.0"

@hexfusion
Copy link

@aojea did you ever get any feedback on this? I am working in the same space and would love to move this forward.

@aojea
Copy link
Owner Author

aojea commented Feb 21, 2022

@aojea did you ever get any feedback on this? I am working in the same space and would love to move this forward.

no feedback sorry, I wrote my comments on the open issue with my observations, but I don't really know how golang community works for adding new features

@aojea aojea closed this Apr 8, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants