Re: [dispatch] [RAI] MSRP Expert Review of draft-pd-dispatch-msrp-websocket-04

Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> Thu, 30 January 2014 14:25 UTC

Return-Path: <ibc@aliax.net>
X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C02D01A0345 for <dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 06:25:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.678
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.678 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NYX5kiEy6SYd for <dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 06:25:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qa0-f44.google.com (mail-qa0-f44.google.com [209.85.216.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F47C1A037D for <dispatch@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 06:25:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qa0-f44.google.com with SMTP id w5so4440478qac.3 for <dispatch@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 06:25:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xvw/IQtsNf+bGsPRqqgtZXWEfPZLpL2YJvCYBVyJksQ=; b=ZDuILmW4W566KG6saTVQJq6b6ATSSWpsXhWos5U06XKYho1sf8V2BcRXe61pMK2ucu pbAQgj8oKKNrkKuwK5/h00cOU/RrfSUXvf+znx95CjOrEO/Q+LGn7chWycQAJ7uh0epO 5FA28E0sp0jEgv1vb6YglnyYw3+Kd6OxQlqsHs4f62b/jp9nW5FcGkAYphQSz70z2t7m oI6Zhabx9Zty/raShc7v6mLopirO2YvnJe2dVuy2HmRWF8dczJLO8KFOHkXb6Z5XbYTY MzFKYNomyetBysHoq/Dgi2X4adTvrWb5Zpz0sYkWevS5jRnpQAzwAyXbjNcyfomunOHl tgrA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnyVGPWiR+oZgkzAzRwhj18oxkdXQBLTa5tb+GeEfaY33xVDuEombLl17DRPzTj5Vv4NE9N
X-Received: by 10.224.7.10 with SMTP id b10mr22514058qab.50.1391091931779; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 06:25:31 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.96.101.232 with HTTP; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 06:25:11 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <02B7636E-68F1-4513-B214-44635162874D@edvina.net>
References: <45B84D8F-AD8C-4B28-90DF-9B1C40771104@nostrum.com> <6833E320-7B45-4FC2-853B-62311DCF7E7B@nostrum.com> <A25E55DD-59E3-4F43-BE9A-6304378FAE0B@cisco.com> <CALiegf=mn1Lg6ihhf8hamn6rVpkLnF3ydGxm1tK1JaNMaioxoQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAEqTk6Q2Dv4a2P-8KJtK=xGZx=mmayt_YdagF2=JyoJ1oYQu7w@mail.gmail.com> <1E320318-64CE-4F8B-AB76-8C4A5244379A@cisco.com> <02B7636E-68F1-4513-B214-44635162874D@edvina.net>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?I=C3=B1aki_Baz_Castillo?= <ibc@aliax.net>
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 15:25:11 +0100
Message-ID: <CALiegfkGu69x0Zy2WschxYyFUJLhPMmwedt3p7q1i+hqJ6Xicg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Olle E. Johansson" <oej@edvina.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "Cullen Jennings \(fluffy\)" <fluffy@cisco.com>, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>, DISPATCH <dispatch@ietf.org>, "rai@ietf.org" <rai@ietf.org>, "draft-pd-dispatch-msrp-websocket.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-pd-dispatch-msrp-websocket.all@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dispatch] [RAI] MSRP Expert Review of draft-pd-dispatch-msrp-websocket-04
X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List <dispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dispatch/>
List-Post: <mailto:dispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 14:25:36 -0000

2014-01-30 Olle E. Johansson <oej@edvina.net>et>:
> If I parse the W3C WebSocket API specification correctly, the script is not allowed to know WHY a Websocket connection failed. It's just a big failure. I would like to understand why they made this choice.

When RFC 6455 (Websocket) was being written I asked for the WebSocket
API [*] to provide more information about the WS connection failure
(specifically a way to know the HTTP error code if the Websocket
handshake fails due to a non HTTP 101 response). No success at all.
The rationale I was provided with is that JavaScript must not be HTTP
or TLS aware. Instead, the browser manages all these rules and errors.
Let's say that JavaScript just can play once the DNS/TCP/TLS/HTTP/WS
layers have succeeded. If they don't, JavaScript cannot figure why; it
just knows that "the connection has failed".

Believe me, that won't change.

[*] http://dev.w3.org/html5/websockets/


-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc@aliax.net>