On 02/17/2010 10:46 PM, Costin Manolache wrote: > On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 11:58 AM, Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org> wrote: > >> On 02/17/2010 07:37 PM, Costin Manolache wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 12:38 AM, Mladen Turk<mt...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> >>> The reasons I suggest using SPDY as a replacement for AJP - and supporting >>> SPDY >>> >> >> I have nothing against SPDY and it really looks cool, >> but IMHO it's doesn't look and feel like the rest of RFC >> protocol specifications. >> If you can push those guys to create a well known RFC-like >> doc, I'm sure that overall internet community will benefit >> from it. >> > > SPDY is still in development - there is an open mailing list and > quite a few proposals/changes/discussions. I would guess > the end result will end up as a RFC-like. Feel free to join the > mailing list and push or volunteer for anything :-) > > The implementations - chrome, mod_spdy are also open source > and with ASF-like license. > > > >> >> OTOH we are discussing this 'protocol thing' for years instead like >> you noticed we concentrate on the tasks we wish to do. >> Think if we start from the protocol side we will stay there (nowhere) >> for few more years (although SPDY might be even more then we need). > > > I think what matters is having a working SPDY implementation in tomcat, > inter-operable > with chrome/mod_spdy/google. If we start with this we'll probably make > more progress than by discussing protocols :-)
Yep, I have noted that people are preparing an implementation for httpd so at some point it will just "porting" that code to TC. Cheers Jean-Frederic --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
