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

Wenbo Zhu <wenboz@google.com> Fri, 28 October 2016 17:37 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 8BA89128DF6 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:37:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.951
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.951 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.431, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com
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 fOVbr3CxlMq0 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:37:20 -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 C656D1279EB for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:37:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1c0B0s-0001Db-Sr for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 17:32:18 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 17:32:18 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1c0B0s-0001Db-Sr@frink.w3.org>
Received: from mimas.w3.org ([128.30.52.79]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <wenboz@google.com>) id 1c0B0m-0001CY-Bv for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 17:32:12 +0000
Received: from mail-yw0-f182.google.com ([209.85.161.182]) by mimas.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <wenboz@google.com>) id 1c0B0g-0001rI-Cw for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 17:32:07 +0000
Received: by mail-yw0-f182.google.com with SMTP id p22so80933268ywe.0 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:31:45 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=aFKdh6kQIPpsL0N6kw9QLcNal9CZMRhesmNebIzYmts=; b=M4chncLkjd5CYi4WcgyMLs8PonVqX6FUSHd2X26F/lIfLnEkZ290nqhSqfRWqhgmVZ uDoKaLkDM0619DBKCCOO16+bgQNrKkq6cmmk2I90H/n/8b+Uq3UAJrXz+JfTxAKSO3mO CFUG7HWShWZ1mDSxqvDPuNk7iGcUv9gMx2bN3zzLZ4XFfHz3F8MRrbBveNopRi9UBECO Ju6oiZGR7QPq20NT+M1dT6xMKKNldMMK3K6z7FBYGtOgVA3i2l6OE2k6S9pJM5Skga0i p4cZTukVHLkOlVRw4B1jNvIekdsn1IOuzSF+ISRRYRZT2fsqyoKZp7yGEctjo+Rp3Hn2 vrDQ==
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; bh=aFKdh6kQIPpsL0N6kw9QLcNal9CZMRhesmNebIzYmts=; b=G6t3e6m5C5mIZjJ4rcC37zxAUKi2OkEcyqs1wRyxNHv3ex6+0pvgm8q76q8FtNOJo1 cmQSNIHyepHKMUUxqohZwNqMPqXxmqv1M2NNa6QDp1q/AoMLJTtWl1vIanP3EJXBPFbl D/T/PNjV2QPoxJrAXqh+em3FIvqyhGQQiypfXMvnsi0WjnxyuDOQkmwmuHmnqWkngsrF E6UB+sH1dF6rlS10hRkoP7YrdbjShYOo3LxiJr5U1caDb6FOr94F08U5YkUyBEoQ9Db/ qIMTbNQERMEIF3zLJxjmVqAeikU0bdfiQtkUm68thC2zzyh4k3grPST44mEHZH4509aG CGQA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvfPbpJyojabq9kFjIHZfi2AypMilCMGsp5c8ILN+2NMcQClEKuB7SyWtSCZ5mdKKfxLDcKelCCNihXqy7/E
X-Received: by 10.36.24.142 with SMTP id 136mr2661977itr.80.1477675899775; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:31:39 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.64.19.244 with HTTP; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:31:38 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <97fa3a7c-473a-6014-732e-ef0879f5eb82@ninenines.eu>
References: <CAH9hSJZdBJ02+Z6o=aanZ=5PN=9VwyL1ZcX2jct-6f_FFivLGA@mail.gmail.com> <0f79ddf6-c455-c41a-f269-a1bdcef05b14@ninenines.eu> <CAH9hSJb2R9gv2vNqoyTjbMV4hZTYdpX2PoAoYgWUT1UuigLHRA@mail.gmail.com> <5541be74-afcc-6aef-404e-63acb2f608eb@ninenines.eu> <CAD3-0rOYZzp2mB3NYZwXvGPUxPz8GG+ih1binEajv3CJFCW-7Q@mail.gmail.com> <97fa3a7c-473a-6014-732e-ef0879f5eb82@ninenines.eu>
From: Wenbo Zhu <wenboz@google.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:31:38 -0700
Message-ID: <CAD3-0rOU+L1Q-Oo6OoSzvc8mjw4Kf4XraSu3chijFOugSc191Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?B?TG/Dr2MgSG9ndWlu?= <essen@ninenines.eu>
Cc: Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1144b79c19fc52053ff03b73
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.161.182; envelope-from=wenboz@google.com; helo=mail-yw0-f182.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=0.580, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.418, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1c0B0g-0001rI-Cw bfe93f456c8ef9cd0fee1f9edb32b64c
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: WiSH: A General Purpose Message Framing over Byte-Stream Oriented Wire Protocols (HTTP)
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAD3-0rOU+L1Q-Oo6OoSzvc8mjw4Kf4XraSu3chijFOugSc191Q@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/32709
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 Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 1:29 AM, Loïc Hoguin <essen@ninenines.eu> wrote:

> On 10/28/2016 04:04 AM, Wenbo Zhu wrote:
>
>>     * The HEAD method behaves as usual. The PUT method is probably not
>>     compatible with doing this. PATCH and DELETE are not compatible AFAIK.
>>
>> Not sure why a PUT/PATCH request can't have a streamed body.  I don't
>> think we want to over-spec how to use HTTP with this media type (which
>> is not the only stream-able media type either)
>>
>
> PUT can definitely have a streamed body, but protocols are a little more
> than that. PUT creates or replaces the resource with the enclosed
> representation, so whether PUT can be used depends on the protocol. If
> webstream is used like an event stream then there's definitely no problem;
> if it's used for MQTT the PUT semantics are lost.
>
> PATCH expects a media type containing instructions on how to modify the
> resource, so again it depends on the protocol.
>
> We should definitely not restrict it to specific methods, and that's not
> what I was trying to say. I was just trying to point out which methods
> should be mentioned in the document, even if only in an informative way or
> in examples.
>
> A more general paragraph about request methods forbidding bodies should be
> more than enough to cover everything without going too much into the
> details of each method.
>
Agreed.

Thanks.


>
> Cheers,
>
>
> --
> Loïc Hoguin
> https://ninenines.eu
>