IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: WebSocket over HTTP/2.0

Yutaka Hirano <yhirano@google.com> Thu, 27 March 2014 11:56 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@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 (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79EE61A0323 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 04:56:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.389
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.389 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 aqIGixUgpns1 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 04:56:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93B391A031A for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 04:56:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1WT8sv-0000wo-4k for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 11:54:13 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 11:54:13 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1WT8sv-0000wo-4k@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <yhirano@google.com>) id 1WT8sf-0000vM-AE for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 11:53:57 +0000
Received: from mail-yh0-f44.google.com ([209.85.213.44]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <yhirano@google.com>) id 1WT8se-0003Jc-3p for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 11:53:57 +0000
Received: by mail-yh0-f44.google.com with SMTP id f10so3369104yha.17 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 04:53:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=DZFPGnslVCl08Vhc358JTjXZL/LiTjyZ96Owpe7tu+k=; b=QN5YNfkt8zpEztYQFCBDunrB4JQdp+J3qHWKUahnmlThTcM3bOd1vWhbd5SJSvdYqG LFvKaRDTYpM3+WjTocHCJ5Lr2o4Bg56qjxaTDONcuTEslepgGwaed+LzI+MO29yFlrx5 2lU21YcbONlMcELBxyhTUvpfwixNJiDdrsyee2gWba0tmBPvmEt5HOA8NChcXe1eVh6i 5oQ1RqRyXva4yvakjfbtXsz/4WQOF7QHZZ9X/ebh/fYyE/3jHGnU2TZjwE/pP1NsBsuz 4aaENKRYZR04ctGLyZQNeUk6bomE2RNRJL+/p2sFHsViYdW5ecdz7jqKU3L+8t4srp1l robw==
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:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=DZFPGnslVCl08Vhc358JTjXZL/LiTjyZ96Owpe7tu+k=; b=D+PfcFZL2hIjA52tatHAbv8B3Lv8mZCm1tAABJr8QO8ZWTDU4FnLr9FwcWw4OfxrzG qKwuEBzi5xwscwfL/hVpAf2zoFs4fBPG3jjhsP1Xv+RWJWLX6jEu2uEvblmrNV+kJTo0 dJgX4NzBIvf9lvKhuaW8G5OO9Oqsc4ktmnozoLIHJjIj4csJO2fDU18GOUcYR6WEXttH ac0tFlG3gkTuM4nVNuRLlINkPvvTZBDjA0o3A/QTK1SvOBG61T7u/nAN38oXSdgFkkBT uQY+1S6WVk3aGPUj08T2vUwMKH9FzXSIyrvbbVADYErE4Npoe5lF4niBRz4FoIUH/vrH 1gMQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk8W/SCEEdoCkgCbjsbNWUN5suEh0afqLqOwrEVLxIubVAI+yDwDY+K4MFyThEkTWCsFe1/ygZNmHLtK2Y/aQ24YelwrAe4k7FA53VhYivS4ZLu5Iyp14m6Y+mDwV9ObBmc2RG4v40YeZpjXNsuc4yLN4jdS685hebHeZYEWe05/NIEITeGf1Q34yRbarntdhYNoeD5
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.236.18.227 with SMTP id l63mr1332431yhl.101.1395921209703; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 04:53:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.170.164.87 with HTTP; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 04:53:29 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABihn6Hfut_FJmbd0kBmZTE3BO35corS4bk_6Siu-PnDQ9J7Kw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABihn6GO7wmYNhyx58Jt43vv0QXzn2=QDqny14byA7DbKfbEcA@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNeRCatTXan6j97JQWBrmhjqB5W7msNfoK7rGsFTKnUkZQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnW9jYcONs4gtUwFkq8Q8rMSH-d0ihHDszC68oQW+SPWCQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABihn6GDRrQC6vnrZJXyFqeUsnZ0DB_4pqxgxXRU=952K6YPgA@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnX3U=G6POLw2bRC_TaCBy66vdJYsqwa+dV2SqEFo+A=1g@mail.gmail.com> <CAH9hSJaXU+EgJxvDzhQr-5MQ_Em-_v1dJHjKZ+AaLixBR1CCBg@mail.gmail.com> <CABihn6Hfut_FJmbd0kBmZTE3BO35corS4bk_6Siu-PnDQ9J7Kw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 20:53:29 +0900
Message-ID: <CABihn6HOMB=bVQOQMPzV+6T=j9DFD8dfDOe8-zipWe5s0i=EYg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Yutaka Hirano <yhirano@google.com>
To: Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com>
Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e0122a64ad6df4104f5953bf2"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.213.44; envelope-from=yhirano@google.com; helo=mail-yh0-f44.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.435, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.371, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1WT8se-0003Jc-3p a43a70ca4e0e4ac7b50d010ef56378ff
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: WebSocket over HTTP/2.0
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CABihn6HOMB=bVQOQMPzV+6T=j9DFD8dfDOe8-zipWe5s0i=EYg@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/22947
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>

>
> I've rewritten the Protocol Negotiation part (Section 3 and Section 4.2.1).
> It now uses Alt-Svc instead of SETTINGS_SUPPORTED_SCHEMES.

Note that the protocol negotiation and the opening handshake parts are
shared among both
WS-over-HTTP/2 drafts (tunneling and message mapping).
Since the protocol negotiation would have a greater impact on other specs
(http/2, alt-svc, etc),
I would like to discuss it earlier than the data framing, to find problems
in time for the deadlines of such specs.

Thanks,



On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Yutaka Hirano <yhirano@google.com> wrote:

> I've rewritten the Protocol Negotiation part (Section 3 and Section 4.2.1).
> It now uses Alt-Svc instead of SETTINGS_SUPPORTED_SCHEMES.
>
>
> https://github.com/yutakahirano/ws-over-http2/blob/master/draft-hirano-websocket-over-http2.txt
>
> Comments will be appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 4:34 AM, Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com>wrote:
>
>> BTW, introduction of the SETTINGS_SUPPORTED_SCHEMES parameter for the
>> SETTINGS frame in the proposal could be discussed separately from the
>> framing discussion. It seems Mark's Alt-Svc I-D also has similar proposal
>> called SETTINGS_UNIVERSAL_SCHEMES [1] though in a different context.
>>
>> [1]
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-httpbis-alt-svc-03#section-3.4
>>
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email