Re: 6455 Websockets and the relationship to HTTP

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Fri, 23 December 2016 14:43 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 8E96B129512 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 06:43:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 RdZMWO0QxshY for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 06:43:11 -0800 (PST)
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 79E5F12948C for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 06:43:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1cKR2M-0001Yj-00 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 14:41:34 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 14:41:33 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1cKR2M-0001Yj-00@frink.w3.org>
Received: from titan.w3.org ([128.30.52.76]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1cKR2D-0001WH-S4 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 14:41:25 +0000
Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net ([216.86.168.182]) by titan.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1cKR2D-0007QX-0c for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 14:41:25 +0000
Received: from [10.0.0.44] (unknown [71.200.63.170]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 09CCC22E1F3; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 09:40:58 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.1 \(3251\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAD3-0rNk6XeBWZFPenSYPQLacowuk822oqpp2A-nRAySKx=hRQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 09:40:58 -0500
Cc: Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>, Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com>, =?utf-8?B?Ik1hcnRpbiBKLiBEw7xyc3Qi?= <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, Andy Green <andy@warmcat.com>, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <5048AF43-3809-4518-9158-62D45DCC56E1@mnot.net>
References: <CAOdDvNqk7W_oNWUismMb-ZuhvdboZNDQ0YV2BLsbka-FGC-7oA@mail.gmail.com> <39F32B28-7116-478A-B02A-E8310EA6E189@mnot.net> <CABkgnnVZeLQGES5Dige8u+ukSgqSfJNKiCuL=oK3gQnAb_3LNw@mail.gmail.com> <CANatvzwoUYaC_YPTTF6fdwN5aOiwrttyH9Xj7xYVR1i1DZ27bA@mail.gmail.com> <037D2D57-7423-4375-9FEC-50B3106F42ED@mnot.net> <CANatvzx=mOQ3kE-vnvwNvD2w26+RNTueHgu7BhHLnJixn0vRcw@mail.gmail.com> <9e6f1a46-a782-a688-5b16-836d28032823@treenet.co.nz> <1480646012.4219.21.camel@warmcat.com> <CAOdDvNqShPUdu6zt-dPDpXm31eP2xX_dahrTr8JEbOOGQFFNSw@mail.gmail.com> <b9874e30-24dd-56d2-896b-aab2848638b5@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <CAOdDvNpixFvywEUHwomVzQW2pNT5+=gn2ZMEgNmGPMDNkVMr7w@mail.gmail.com> <CAD3-0rNk6XeBWZFPenSYPQLacowuk822oqpp2A-nRAySKx=hRQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Wenbo Zhu <wenboz@google.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3251)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.86.168.182; envelope-from=mnot@mnot.net; helo=mxout-07.mxes.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.6
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1cKR2D-0007QX-0c 55f06295e34fab5e6aaa2ae7b92fc0c5
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: 6455 Websockets and the relationship to HTTP
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/5048AF43-3809-4518-9158-62D45DCC56E1@mnot.net>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/33233
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>

Sorry to perpetuate this thread, but...

On 15 Dec. 2016, at 11:39 am, Wenbo Zhu <wenboz@google.com> wrote:
> 
> On non-browsers,

*confused*

AIUI the *only* reasonable use case for WebSockets is browsers; who is using it without a browser?

(keeping in mind that WS is effectively TCP constrained by the Web security / same-origin model)

Cheers,

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/