Questions about HTTP/2 implementation methods.

[dgrr]

Hello,

I am developing HTTP/2 for fasthttp a week ago and I am finding some troubles. My implementation consists of integrating HTTP/2 protocol inside fasthttp and making user choose if he/she wants HTTP/2 enabled or not by using boolean var in Server. All goes well until now... To make this implementation possible I do the following:

• Create a new handler (I tried to keep the serveConn function as default connection handler but this is impossible due to framing model of HTTP/2).
• I adapted some functions to HTTP/2 request and response model.
• Obviously I implemented HPACK RFC.
• And another stuff I don't remember right now.

At this point I am confused with the current implementation. I want to reuse all the code as much as I can but I see that the best way to make HTTP/2 possible in fasthttp is by making a new package (or subpackage) implementing this protocol (as net/http has) or making a radical change of the library.

There are two ways:

• Keeping the current schema and adapting it to HTTP/2 protocol by changing all the code written by @valyala as much as we need to make HTTP/2 possible.
• Creating new subpackage and making Server.tlsConfig public (because this variable must be treated by HTTP/2 implementation)

What do you think or what do you prefer?

[erikdubbelboer]

It's hard for me to reason about this as I have no idea what kind of changes would be required to the code. Would a subpackage and making Server.tlsConfig public be enough? What would the interface for this subpackage be?

[dgrr]

Okay. I created new repository to implement HTTP/2 protocol and to be compatible with your fork @erikdubbelboer

[erikdubbelboer]

Ok I added myself as Watcher so I can see your commits.