IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Giving the Framing Layer a real name

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Wed, 27 February 2013 19:04 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 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7649B21F8A33 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:04:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.282
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.282 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.317, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6RVk9xEbP91U for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:04:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8D1121F8833 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:04:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UAmIH-00053Y-An for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 19:03:57 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 19:03:57 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UAmIH-00053Y-An@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1UAmI4-00052J-FT for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 19:03:44 +0000
Received: from mail-wg0-f42.google.com ([74.125.82.42]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1UAmI3-0003sH-OS for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 19:03:44 +0000
Received: by mail-wg0-f42.google.com with SMTP id 12so5609652wgh.3 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:03:17 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=mC+yRxaYBLEYn1pmhf/3Nku+9CIS9hp6rWCj4d78ocQ=; b=aK03xDKcEMcV6MbKqt9mNlD9zT3UWtB3p28U9IbyDb4M5XbV69NSW8uZR2h0pB4fdy lyftIjg8X5BhFbofp77YooEHw4Ad2EST5lZBlsd3sF3xmV0QeAwewDAqXtamon8rXahz 3mJDixAN1QQp3HP31BEP+4Xhlnb0algmJ6bopIUJ0tVAInZgLPUqdOUHTdECYKOP0wI+ f0bpFETG4+SImeCwbO4w5fyoVawCya31p0k19pZHeSbKXsPGZpvj2AFM2CY4SJxh+ao/ alyBzcgw/3k6vUadI8iFnoETPSoNWbggmEf8jqQ6S/Nqouf3VX9HCSdicuB5xyVrsagb xQ+A==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.76.84 with SMTP id i20mr6063731wiw.9.1361991796850; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:03:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.194.5.135 with HTTP; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:03:16 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAP+FsNcgQExR0mheLSE+D5Vo_B66oPBQfPhtszv3=icDuyGGYw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5479F0BA-C5E0-4DA0-BFA4-ECE174388C3F@mnot.net> <CABaLYCv9FdOoCooFZ4s0G4E0EHGQUEizJAGYB-BGoya7B90_9A@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnUWYR_scokR6DbBoFdD3ZqYF6gWqcis94tA9mHTD0o9cQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABP7Rbe5CyLFjRCRUtE8ZwO+4hdDF=2iuvaPNNqqWRCBzpT+PA@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNcgQExR0mheLSE+D5Vo_B66oPBQfPhtszv3=icDuyGGYw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:03:16 -0800
Message-ID: <CABkgnnWsTNzSYTuSkVWTHaUMsygA+8A3aP-W+00SXd0=xrLbYw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
Cc: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=74.125.82.42; envelope-from=martin.thomson@gmail.com; helo=mail-wg0-f42.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-1.711, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1UAmI3-0003sH-OS 2626b9d93b8834704d1a0b46b0fca6a8
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Giving the Framing Layer a real name
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CABkgnnWsTNzSYTuSkVWTHaUMsygA+8A3aP-W+00SXd0=xrLbYw@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/16890
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>

On 27 February 2013 10:51, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com> wrote:
> Then you can't do websockets, etc or whatever other protocol (maybe video?,
> who knows) the web platform decides to do in the future on the same
> socket/session.

Not true.  Write another RFC that says how you can share the
connection with websockets.  That might have to change some of the
rules, loosen some of the constraints, add some features.

> That would be a poor tradeoff.. and for what gain?
> What is the additional complexity of having the framing allow for non HTTP
> semantics?

The cost is in building generality.  Generality in engineering is
never general enough to solve unforeseen problems, and it never ever
comes with a zero complexity cost.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email