Looks good. (In reply to Ed Guloien [:edgul] from comment #4) *h2 conn with h2 support* - I think you mean h2 conn with h2-ws support, right? > 2. h1.1 ws fallback when existing h2 conn but we don't yet know yet about h2-ws server support I think that might be difficult to test. If we have an existing h2 conn, presumably it should have already received a settings frame?
Bug 1800529 Comment 5 Edit History
Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.
Looks good. (In reply to Ed Guloien [:edgul] from comment #4) *h2 conn with h2 support* - I think you mean h2 conn with h2-ws support, right? > 2. h1.1 ws fallback when existing h2 conn but we don't yet know yet about h2-ws server support I think that might be difficult to test. If we have an existing h2 conn, presumably it should have already received a settings frame?