> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com]
> Sent: donderdag 3 december 2015 22:20
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Subject: Re: reverse proxy wishlist
>
>
> > On Dec 3, 2015, at 11:09 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 8:59 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote:
> >
> > What would *you* like to see as new features or enhancements
> > w/ mod_proxy, esp reverse proxy.
> >
> > HTTP/2 support, of course :) It will be interesting to be able to
leverage
> > and compare a mod_proxy_serf vs a mod_proxy_http2 (nghttp2-based)
> > engine, as mentioned in another thread - multiple implementations
> > are always good for ferreting out protocol anomalies.
> >
>
> It's kind of funny... the "need" for http/2 between proxy and
> origin seems pretty non-existant. There is a blog post by Cloudflare
> somewhere about how they don't see servers talking http/2 to the
> backend as anywhere near a driver, since all the things that make
> it "important" (koff koff!) between browser and server don't really
> apply.
After having implemented fcgi (server support) and http/2 (server and
client) in Apache Serf I was thinking that it would be nice if H2 would
replace the existing server side protocols.
http/1.1 requires chunking or explicit content-length, while http/2 and fcgi
don't have that requirement.
The reason I implemented the server side of those protocols in Apache Serf
was exactly to allow writing such origins with Serf...
Adding such a backend server process is one of the (many) possible
directions Subversion might take in the future.
Bert
