HTTP 2

  • Jokersona
    15th May 2015 Member 0 Permalink

    Yesterday, the largest update to the HTTP protocol in 16 years was published, as RFC 7540. From what I've read HTTP 2 should reduce connection times, and be more secure. Google.com already supports HTTP 2.

  • NF
    15th May 2015 Member 0 Permalink

    So the last major HTTP protocol was in 1999 until now?Atleast I was born in 1998. 

    Edited 3 times by NUCLEAR_FOX. Last: 15th May 2015
  • Jokersona
    15th May 2015 Member 0 Permalink

    NUCLEAR_FOX:

    So the last major HTTP protocol was in 1999 until now. Atleast I was born in 1998. 

     

    92 for me. I remember the Y2k bug too.

  • NF
    15th May 2015 Member 0 Permalink

    Nice you're two years older than jacob1. What was Y2k bug about?

    Edited once by NUCLEAR_FOX. Last: 15th May 2015
  • EE
    15th May 2015 Banned 0 Permalink
    This post is hidden because the user is banned
  • Jokersona
    16th May 2015 Member 0 Permalink

    NUCLEAR_FOX:

    Nice you're two years older than jacob1. What was Y2k bug about?

     

    The date value overflowed, so you'd get dates like 1900, etc. Many systems just assumed the year should always begin with 19. Such systems rolled back to 1900 on Jan 1, 2000.

     

    Some people were fanatical about it being a possible apocalypse even (sort of like the 2012 thing).

    Edited once by ChargedCreeper. Last: 15th May 2015
  • NF
    16th May 2015 Member 0 Permalink

    @ChargedCreeper (View Post)

     Yeah I heard about that. A lot of people thought the world was going to end, cause the computers years ended in 1999.

  • Jokersona
    16th May 2015 Member 0 Permalink

    NUCLEAR_FOX:

    @ChargedCreeper (View Post)

     Yeah I heard about that. A lot of people thought the world was going to end, cause the computers years ended in 1999.

     

    There is a 2038 bug too. History repeats itself sometimes.

    http://www.disastercountdown.com/event/y2k38/

    Edited once by ChargedCreeper. Last: 16th May 2015
  • MiningMarsh
    16th May 2015 Member 0 Permalink

    @ChargedCreeper (View Post)

    It doesn't really have to do with assuming the year starts with 19, and has more to do with systems being mostly 32bit at the time.

  • Jokersona
    16th May 2015 Member 0 Permalink

    MiningMarsh:

    @ChargedCreeper (View Post)

    It doesn't really have to do with assuming the year starts with 19, and has more to do with systems being mostly 32bit at the time.

     

    Some systems did assume 19 though. Not all, but some did. Also, in the 90s, many 16-bit systems were still around.

    Edited once by ChargedCreeper. Last: 16th May 2015