Re: WebSocket HTTP2

Patrick McManus <> Thu, 13 October 2016 14:21 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0077E129907 for <>; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 07:21:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.416
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.416 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-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=-2.996, 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 JADUYBmwy601 for <>; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 07:21:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B0F4129904 for <>; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 07:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <>) id 1bugof-0006y0-Pl for; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 14:17:01 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 14:17:01 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <>
Received: from ([]) by with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <>) id 1bugob-0006xB-PM for; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 14:16:57 +0000
Received: from ([]) by with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <>) id 1bugoU-00040N-6m for; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 14:16:56 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed;; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:subject:to:cc:content-type; s=smtpapi; bh=J7t8fcpC+5w03nxvcRJsPZOltYs=; b=cWhmYZKx0hSRUrkz2l D65+VH4E+xZRNuiRda+7oWovAXjo6ST3p5F+c/iGsutq80B4Ip3zjpJ/WlnlbeHR H4wrzDuh4NwQFdphXGig1fLT/L8blvopTYSUDJJqZXh/I+xbTSEYc/deOvmVpzIB yQz8S09KxPtTe2ZU4jUa70B30=
Received: by with SMTP id filter0837p1mdw1.23160.57FF972AA 2016-10-13 14:16:10.110143879 +0000 UTC
Received: from ( []) by (SG) with ESMTP id TW-9Or9xSmuYoU9IQMjQWA for <>; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 14:16:10.165 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by with SMTP id e203so124901493itc.0 for <>; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 07:16:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9Rnm3VTiHQHwsYJnxtOzDbuBHu5dH5u6YAWEcnx5lgTJzlfT7bFDCLcvGwNyPUtMfht3+F85Q6LFFslFQQ==
X-Received: by with SMTP id 1mr8317461itu.47.1476368169773; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 07:16:09 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with HTTP; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 07:16:09 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
From: Patrick McManus <>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 08:16:09 -0600
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <>
Message-ID: <>
To: Volodymyr Matvienko <>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1143d5ca51355b053ebfc04b
X-SG-EID: YLWet4rakcOTMHWvPPwWbcsiUJbN1FCn0PHYd/Uujh5jYBB53t2dqsDeYBM8utu8H2W6Q5XcN2N7uf llB2lKsTh0XXHNb/5CATOXm/x0oYvsMx3J238piMbGnqZBZqo8opESfePOPMkCYB3IvkOErAoyz0Zw 0MnQdjE9PQxIjH3x4op4Mi2ShreH3mBuXIIqrdg4Iy8wejf3A/1VtKSSE4dqq54ltKPkYCsdJ/nzVw U=
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=;;
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-0.973, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.362, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_GREY=0.424, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: 1bugoU-00040N-6m 207ec9299aeecbda234e1ceed5c50bce
Subject: Re: WebSocket HTTP2
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailing-List: <> archive/latest/32578
Precedence: list
List-Id: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>

Hi - thanks for writing. At this stage I would suggest the best path would
be to participate in the discussions already happening on list and doing
your best to relate them to the individual drafts in this space. Even
summarizing areas of agreement and controversy is a useful contribution to
help focus the conversation and of course experience with code around
proposals is always a powerful comment. When we meet at the next IETF in
november we will make websockets part of the discussion - to try and get a
sense of whether people want to adopt that as a working group task going
forward. There has been mild interest in the past, but it does seem to be
gaining significant interest lately. You can participate in that remotely
via meetecho or in person, and of course actual determinations would be
made via mailing list not as part of the meeting.


On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:19 AM, Volodymyr Matvienko <>

> Hello, I working on my high performance server that operating on http/2
> layer and I really need support of such things like xhr or websocket over
> http/2.
> I'm developer, I can think and my hands grow from the right place.
> How can I help you to do faster standards for ws over http/2?