Re: SETTINGS_WEBSOCKET_CAPABLE | Re: WebSocket2

Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org> Thu, 13 October 2016 16:57 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E976F129582 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 09:57:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.917
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.917 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.996, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 oV64yXWUfyYq for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 09:57:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 297E31293D8 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 09:57:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1bujFk-0000u7-5E for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 16:53:08 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 16:53:08 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1bujFk-0000u7-5E@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <hurtta@siilo.fmi.fi>) id 1bujFh-0000tT-QK for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 16:53:05 +0000
Received: from smtpvgate.fmi.fi ([193.166.223.36]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <hurtta@siilo.fmi.fi>) id 1bujFf-0006ir-9F for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 16:53:05 +0000
Received: from basaari.fmi.fi (basaari.fmi.fi [193.166.211.14]) (envelope-from hurtta@siilo.fmi.fi) by smtpVgate.fmi.fi (8.13.8/8.13.8/smtpgate-20160114/smtpVgate) with ESMTP id u9DGqXWa010826 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 13 Oct 2016 19:52:33 +0300
Received: from shell.siilo.fmi.fi by basaari.fmi.fi with ESMTP id u9DGqWug010353 ; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 19:52:32 +0300
Received: from shell.siilo.fmi.fi ([127.0.0.1]) by shell.siilo.fmi.fi with ESMTP id u9DGqWgP007810 ; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 19:52:32 +0300
Received: by shell.siilo.fmi.fi id u9DGqWfQ007809; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 19:52:32 +0300
Message-Id: <201610131652.u9DGqWfQ007809@shell.siilo.fmi.fi>
In-Reply-To: <CAH9hSJaWXJWH4mK3J3WyHGtc4ohKyDL-AGcGYsJMj=6hob_ChQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG-EYChPJpAzoEuNwY3cNz503d0FRbNnDx_9AsNsZyfb5nmN0g@mail.gmail.com> <20161002080030.5F328160CC@welho-filter4.welho.com> <20161002101548.GA9450@LK-Perkele-V2.elisa-laajakaista.fi> <201610021110.u92BAWpi019029@shell.siilo.fmi.fi> <20161002124346.GB9450@LK-Perkele-V2.elisa-laajakaista.fi> <201610021340.u92DeBBL029907@shell.siilo.fmi.fi> <20161002171905.GA10108@LK-Perkele-V2.elisa-laajakaista.fi> <201610030440.u934e3kL031002@shell.siilo.fmi.fi> <CAG-EYCgEs1oSdLeLVwd12ECaL=+3pzytuy89xFWvvKCEY8fi4g@mail.gmail.com> <CAH9hSJaMsKaoTK+kr2X_GP_T7=jcDQtFLSusYrV+nDWCadcyxg@mail.gmail.com> <201610041520.u94FK6vV008976@shell.siilo.fmi.fi> <CAH9hSJY40AnYE1JTuc1aYFzRtaT-+PwX8M7YeVj2cbosCfD0TQ@mail.gmail.com> <201610050703.u95732mX018193@shell.siilo.fmi.fi> <CAH9hSJaWXJWH4mK3J3WyHGtc4ohKyDL-AGcGYsJMj=6hob_ChQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 19:52:32 +0300 (EEST)
Sender: hurtta@siilo.fmi.fi
From: Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>
CC: Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>, Van Catha <vans554@gmail.com>, Ilari Liusvaara <ilariliusvaara@welho.com>, HTTP working group mailing list <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
X-Mailer: ELM [version ME+ 2.5 PLalpha41]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
X-Filter: smtpVgate.fmi.fi: 3 received headers rewritten with id 20161013/27923/01
X-Filter: smtpVgate.fmi.fi: ID 27924/01, 1 parts scanned for known viruses
X-Filter: basaari.fmi.fi: ID 134998/01, 1 parts scanned for known viruses
Received-SPF: none client-ip=193.166.223.36; envelope-from=hurtta@siilo.fmi.fi; helo=smtpVgate.fmi.fi
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.6
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-1.322, BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.357, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1bujFf-0006ir-9F f90e3d4a953c0e5b992b648184a8454b
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: SETTINGS_WEBSOCKET_CAPABLE | Re: WebSocket2
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/201610131652.u9DGqWfQ007809@shell.siilo.fmi.fi>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/32581
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com>om>: (Thu Oct 13 10:20:57 2016)
> > There're two approaches to realize this:
> > > (a) let the server send SETTINGS and let the client send handshake
> > > speculatively without waiting for the SETTINGS
> > > (b) let the client send SETTINGS and then send handshake speculatively,
> > and
> > > let the server determine the response status code based on whether or not
> > > it has received SETTINGS as specified in Yutaka's I-D.
> > >
> > > (a) still gives the client path check result before receiving the
> > WebSocket
> > > handshake response, but it's not good that the server cannot know whether
> > > the path was good or not before accepting the WebSocket handshake.
> >
> > yet one more possibility:
> >
> > It is also possible that HTTP/2 server sets SETTINGS_WEBSOCKET_CAPABLE = 1
> > on initial SETTINGS which is part of server greeting.  This add little
> > overhead on case where client does not use websockect2.
> >
> 
> I think you meant the SETTINGS sent following the connection preface
> (following the Finished message of TLS from the server).

Yes, that SETTINGS which is connection preface.

3.5.  HTTP/2 Connection Preface
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7540#section-3.5

|   The server connection preface consists of a potentially empty
|   SETTINGS frame (Section 6.5) that MUST be the first frame the server
|   sends in the HTTP/2 connection.

> Yeah, that's another option with some disadvantage as you described.
> 
> <snip>
> 

/ Kari Hurtta