Re: [alto] WebSocket-based notifications
Ravi nandiraju <ravi.nandiraju@huawei.com> Fri, 20 July 2012 12:16 UTC
Return-Path: <ravi.nandiraju@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: alto@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: alto@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDE4721F8570 for <alto@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 05:16:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EwscDe+IvMWj for <alto@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 05:16:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dfwrgout.huawei.com (dfwrgout.huawei.com [206.16.17.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CEEA21F84C2 for <alto@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 05:16:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.9.243 (EHLO dfweml201-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.9.243]) by dfwrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.2.3-GA FastPath) with ESMTP id AIE68584; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 08:17:38 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from DFWEML406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.131) by dfweml201-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.107) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 05:15:53 -0700
Received: from SZXEML419-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.158) by dfweml406-hub.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.131) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 05:15:59 -0700
Received: from SZXEML523-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.6.147]) by szxeml419-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.82.67.158]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 20:15:45 +0800
From: Ravi nandiraju <ravi.nandiraju@huawei.com>
To: Enrico Marocco <enrico.marocco@telecomitalia.it>, "alto@ietf.org" <alto@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [alto] WebSocket-based notifications
Thread-Index: AQHNYyYb4mU7ZTbG0kmBbVNyNwcp9ZcyFpFD
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 12:15:44 +0000
Message-ID: <7FA18E7BC523F04096632E46DA905D7A51DC0EA7@szxeml523-mbs.china.huawei.com>
References: <5003C514.70806@telecomitalia.it>
In-Reply-To: <5003C514.70806@telecomitalia.it>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.18.96.96]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Subject: Re: [alto] WebSocket-based notifications
X-BeenThere: alto@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Application-Layer Traffic Optimization \(alto\) WG mailing list" <alto.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/alto>, <mailto:alto-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto>
List-Post: <mailto:alto@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:alto-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto>, <mailto:alto-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 12:16:43 -0000
Hi Enrico, I went through the proposed mechanism of notifications based on WebSocket protocol. I think this mechanism has the additional overhead of server needing to keep the connection alive for all the clients which need notification. This works well if the number of clients are less. In case of scenarios where the clients are more, then the server needs to manage a lot of connections. The additonal drawback of this mechanism is that if there is no change in the map data then the connections still needs to be managed by the server. -Ravi ________________________________________ From: alto-bounces@ietf.org [alto-bounces@ietf.org] on behalf of Enrico Marocco [enrico.marocco@telecomitalia.it] Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 1:09 PM To: alto@ietf.org Subject: [alto] WebSocket-based notifications Folks, Jan and I have just submitted a draft proposing a server-to-client notification mechanism based on the WebSocket protocol: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-marocco-alto-ws-01 The mechanism proposed is one of the several possible, and the draft at this point delineates the idea only at quite a high level, without delving too deep into the details. Yet it should be enough to start a focused discussion, so please, if you are interested in the topic, take a quick read and share your thoughts on the list -- whether you feel this is a promising way to go, or if you have alternatives that you think would fit better. -- Ciao, Enrico
- [alto] WebSocket-based notifications Enrico Marocco
- Re: [alto] WebSocket-based notifications Ravi nandiraju
- Re: [alto] WebSocket-based notifications Enrico Marocco
- Re: [alto] WebSocket-based notifications Ravi nandiraju
- Re: [alto] WebSocket-based notifications Enrico Marocco
- Re: [alto] WebSocket-based notifications Ravi nandiraju
- Re: [alto] WebSocket-based notifications Enrico Marocco
- Re: [alto] WebSocket-based notifications Ravi nandiraju
- Re: [alto] WebSocket-based notifications Enrico Marocco
- Re: [alto] WebSocket-based notifications Ravi nandiraju
- Re: [alto] WebSocket-based notifications Y. Richard Yang
- Re: [alto] WebSocket-based notifications Diego R. Lopez
- Re: [alto] WebSocket-based notifications Peter Saint-Andre