HTTPS' massive speed advantage

Re:HTTPS' massive speed advantage by richardwhiuk on Thursday July 21, 2016 @02:44PM (#12139049)

But the other point is that https now means HTTP/2 or HTTP/1.1, where as http always mean HTTP/1.1 - so I'm not sure that's true.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:HTTPS' massive speed advantage by tedunangst on Thursday July 21, 2016 @03:02PM (#12139200)

If https can mean one of two things, but http2 clearly means only one thing, why would anybody choose to use the term https unless they are trying to be deceptive?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:HTTPS' massive speed advantage by c22 on Thursday July 21, 2016 @03:23PM (#12139345)

Or of they're trying to refer to the thing that http2 is not?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:HTTPS' massive speed advantage by falcolas on Thursday July 21, 2016 @03:05PM (#12139227)

https and HTTP/2 are not the same thing, though. Until HTTP/2 traffic is the vast majority when compared to HTTP/1.1 with TLS, you can't claim https and HTTP/2 are the same.

For example, if you terminate your secure traffic on an AWS ELB (or using S3, or CloudFront), you are serving HTTP/1.1 with TLS. And will be for the foreseeable future.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:HTTPS' massive speed advantage by jimktrains2 on Thursday July 21, 2016 @03:33PM (#12139408)

Can you point me to the RFC where https was redefined to not be HTTP/1.1 over TLS?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:HTTPS' massive speed advantage by richardwhiuk on Monday August 01, 2016 @09:53AM (#12202350)

https was never defined in an RFC in the first place, as I understand it, it's just defacto used for that since Netscape started.

[ Parent | on HN ]