> Am 19.04.2016 um 17:47 schrieb William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>: > > I agree with your analysis, "h2" is not an upgrade candidate. > > "h2c" is an upgrade candidate. > > This isn't even an HTTP/2 issue (unless the working group reverses themselves > on accepting Upgrade: h2 protocol switching), until we accept Upgrade: h2 we > should be dropping h2 from the server Upgrade: response header. But do let > us know what the wg feedback is.
While I do not feel strongly about this feature, I'd like to add that the "Upgrade: h2" is sent out as that very mechanism is available to a client. And I do not feel strongly because I do not know of a client that might be able to use it. It is just the result of a sane software architecture that this has become visible. We would probably not be talking about this if some Javascript client implementation had not consciously decided to freak out on *any* Upgrade: header from the server. If http-wg thinks that it should not be visible, I'll add the extra 'if' to our implementation. Cheers, Stefan
