IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Giving the Framing Layer a real name

Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com> Wed, 27 February 2013 18:52 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 DD00121F88E6 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:52:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.409
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.409 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.189, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 6Yd22jjsKXyI for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:52:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 051C221F8A8A for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:52:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UAm6x-0008AG-Kb for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 18:52:15 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 18:52:15 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UAm6x-0008AG-Kb@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <grmocg@gmail.com>) id 1UAm6o-00089R-Hg for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 18:52:06 +0000
Received: from mail-oa0-f53.google.com ([209.85.219.53]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <grmocg@gmail.com>) id 1UAm6n-0007nb-NT for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 18:52:06 +0000
Received: by mail-oa0-f53.google.com with SMTP id m1so1894840oag.26 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:51:39 -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=Rb3B8IELd+KaIw+7TQMyQg7u6bEg3gXbeHvivwz2PLo=; b=LehhcqAfGmkeN0tDqrgHQY4MO95lcMirGi/JyhdfRt+au8z7xMA9ZuCt9ewhdCqSeF iyBMP141ETelWQp77cqTAQEqLc+82hW/VSdtPRAU7UCkkRjq5cpxiJWMlD7BjOEs4IWH 3nZoT8RCv98DEUK6pibbEU5Jv4s+x7joE+6THiEwYgZTqJNb5vN2oIpDhXf9r6nfGvej gA1m0ds98kiDQTSLenTd8fPXLlDNhBlJSvEXvFlrNCxJyax/M7Xnmxe+NiJtSo+DWP/b hzJlo+23HqHH6GSPX091D0x8UtbrKhzHzqfK2Jx1elb+gMgE07kv1Iy2LSIvPofvsExz SgZA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.132.43 with SMTP id or11mr3232682obb.67.1361991099757; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:51:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.76.109.72 with HTTP; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:51:39 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CABP7Rbe5CyLFjRCRUtE8ZwO+4hdDF=2iuvaPNNqqWRCBzpT+PA@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>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:51:39 -0800
Message-ID: <CAP+FsNcgQExR0mheLSE+D5Vo_B66oPBQfPhtszv3=icDuyGGYw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="14dae93a0c17b03e3c04d6b943c3"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.219.53; envelope-from=grmocg@gmail.com; helo=mail-oa0-f53.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.647, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1UAm6n-0007nb-NT 64bff5efded25d9963c248ad0adb6096
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Giving the Framing Layer a real name
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAP+FsNcgQExR0mheLSE+D5Vo_B66oPBQfPhtszv3=icDuyGGYw@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/16888
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>

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.

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


On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 10:13 AM, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1
> On Feb 27, 2013 10:03 AM, "Martin Thomson" <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 27 February 2013 00:49, Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com> wrote:
>> > My vote would be to nuke the layering and instead fold section 4 (the
>> HTTP
>> > Layering) into the appropriate sections of the framing layer.  Trying to
>> > make these generic frames seems like a distraction, and it would be
>> simpler
>> > for folks to read if these were just the basics of HTTP framing.
>>
>> I said as much to mark in private: the framing layer is for HTTP.  A
>> name implies that it might stand alone.  That's not going to be true.
>> The work to make it true is not worthwhile either.
>>
>>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email