RE: WiSH: A General Purpose Message Framing over Byte-Stream Oriented Wire Protocols (HTTP)

Mike Bishop <> Wed, 30 November 2016 19:34 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8160E12996E for <>; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 11:34:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.897
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.896, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6TbDO-fitP6I for <>; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 11:34:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C6D0129977 for <>; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 11:34:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <>) id 1cCAaR-0006ql-5W for; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 19:30:35 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 19:30:35 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <>
Received: from ([]) by with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <>) id 1cCAaK-0005yf-0b for; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 19:30:28 +0000
Received: from ([] by with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <>) id 1cCAaD-0005zn-1r for; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 19:30:22 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=mbE7KYx7J/lI1XUcsgBsIkWDI4DXT2vmwvlrpd7fPs4=; b=FqVjbGtGEnFW8hsm+zaGqi763DD0RMmwv1bhzUf97UVAH/uZ2TtGZ6O37fvH11nWlOO4VacOrU5oC8OiBa70bOovaqYNqgrHe3oeXhFqTfxLHsTrz/nbiu6iuueKOSJUaNgbBPNht/Crb70xhmDCGgZDhahmcsc54OtOf42swzU=
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.747.13; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 19:29:53 +0000
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.01.0747.018; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 19:29:53 +0000
From: Mike Bishop <>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <>, Van Catha <>
CC: Mark Nottingham <>, Takeshi Yoshino <>, Willy Tarreau <>, Andy Green <>, " Group" <>, Wenbo Zhu <>, Martin Thomson <>
Thread-Topic: WiSH: A General Purpose Message Framing over Byte-Stream Oriented Wire Protocols (HTTP)
Thread-Index: AQHSSPSXval3CVidRUCF8VQyI436x6Dx7RvQ
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 19:29:53 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is );
x-originating-ip: [2001:4898:80e8:c::14c]
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 0027e269-f36a-4c59-f69c-08d419574273
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:(22001);SRVR:BN6PR03MB2708;
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BN6PR03MB2708; 7:ZINmD54BBITaINqaRCm2mBZexaIfSatufKyn/iw+Nwrn25qRtpO8KIOc0gjC4uGpzG3JJ71/fpWRQlfCJQf0+DEg0Rl5qT37+CPSozFzDjmJ3t81zP0lZiKAl9w4r3+uGC3Rog1/l1w7OcoqJ9uVQ1WBIN/D1UrOcI61szusvVBtILn/DZdN2on0LtXM44f1G0WEa0Bv6l/9absNWgkVyXulG4OF78/fnUcSB91CWQ+Wdbo7oqW7+MIQfs4OT6UxCT6sHVpseLKs6jUWDpfHK3YSCUbiToccDE82KFI8LfY1bkjYzT03AJ7KUyMORJ9M70kYImthjlkdqlmUKd8wu2/TEg4Q7r8DeK9zVdEIFVUoE7hby5ifGidWSpTg1aJ22zyrHso9EhcWwbayDaTVLsCDtQ/pJl8sLVVE3aEvhYLpyPw4QRiZhNBIC1i5PM56zM0K/OVBECkW0hFCv+bnwhS8Oo/6Tp/kwz35JKE/ihE=
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(211936372134217);
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(61425038)(6040375)(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(3002001)(10201501046)(6055026)(61426038)(61427038)(6041248)(20161123564025)(20161123562025)(20161123555025)(20161123560025)(6047074)(6072148); SRVR:BN6PR03MB2708; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BN6PR03MB2708;
x-forefront-prvs: 0142F22657
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(7916002)(199003)(377454003)(189002)(13464003)(10090500001)(86612001)(92566002)(74316002)(5001770100001)(97736004)(50986999)(54356999)(76176999)(86362001)(8990500004)(3660700001)(39410400001)(10290500002)(6506003)(5005710100001)(6116002)(39450400002)(305945005)(229853002)(7736002)(7846002)(3280700002)(68736007)(39060400001)(38730400001)(2900100001)(101416001)(76576001)(102836003)(8936002)(33656002)(7696004)(122556002)(4326007)(2950100002)(93886004)(2906002)(106356001)(81156014)(8676002)(105586002)(81166006)(106116001)(15650500001)(9686002)(99286002)(77096006)(5660300001)(189998001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BN6PR03MB2708;; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None ( does not designate permitted sender hosts)
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 30 Nov 2016 19:29:53.3157 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BN6PR03MB2708
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=;;
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.401, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_NW=0.5
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: 1cCAaD-0005zn-1r 915e5682ab7ff64d3b12fd66f6ea4d75
Subject: RE: WiSH: A General Purpose Message Framing over Byte-Stream Oriented Wire Protocols (HTTP)
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailing-List: <> archive/latest/33052
Precedence: list
List-Id: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>

QUIC's charter doesn't have anything directly to do with WebSockets.  But I agree that since WebSockets came from a different WG, it might be a reasonable question to the ADs whether that working group should be rechartered to do an HTTP/2 or HTTP/QUIC port.

HTTP/2 makes many of the pre-WebSocket solutions to this problem space much cheaper.  QUIC will probably make it even more so.  If there are people who feel strongly that WebSockets still meet a need over a modern HTTP, I'm happy to read and occasionally comment, but I don't feel called to be integral to that work.

-----Original Message-----
From: Poul-Henning Kamp [] 
Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2016 1:19 PM
To: Van Catha <>
Cc: Mark Nottingham <>; Takeshi Yoshino <>; Willy Tarreau <>; Andy Green <>; Group <>; Wenbo Zhu <>; Martin Thomson <>
Subject: Re: WiSH: A General Purpose Message Framing over Byte-Stream Oriented Wire Protocols (HTTP)

In message <>
, Van Catha writes:

>So can we form a new WG then and focus on doing this right vs making 
>WebSocket2.  The focus earlier was to get the already coded clients and 
>API (websocket API) to be able to work with websockets layered on 
>HTTP2/QUIC, if we are in it for the long haul now we might as well form 
>a new group and create something more long term?

Apologies for asking a stupid question, but isn't that exactly what QUIC is all about in the first place ?

Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.