IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-08.txt

Denis Lagno <dilmah@chromium.org> Thu, 09 June 2011 10:18 UTC

Return-Path: <dilmah@google.com>
X-Original-To: hybi@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E3FB11E80F8 for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jun 2011 03:18:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 e2C5Bt7RVqgb for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jun 2011 03:18:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (smtp-out.google.com [216.239.44.51]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05AF811E80F2 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jun 2011 03:18:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hpaq11.eem.corp.google.com (hpaq11.eem.corp.google.com [172.25.149.11]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id p59AIsk0014498 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jun 2011 03:18:54 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1307614734; bh=Zr+TyxrSzbu7/yh12p3jnvlizlA=; h=MIME-Version:Sender:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: Subject:From:To:Cc:Content-Type; b=QnlwyotGE0nsWeHMzm6CIZ7XnpVtz7f25vPcaTVB+9waRxxHYpdyMnk+LOE3xW9DP jamsJ2hse4cXosLLuvjHw==
Received: from qyk29 (qyk29.prod.google.com [10.241.83.157]) by hpaq11.eem.corp.google.com with ESMTP id p59AIqiA015504 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for <hybi@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jun 2011 03:18:52 -0700
Received: by qyk29 with SMTP id 29so2474415qyk.3 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Thu, 09 Jun 2011 03:18:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=yjZBr3drEfhtgvmIOQwFgYeg4oYaFWN/lSaVkuEneRc=; b=cTMYkDPl812SUtHVBaZbW8zmXnQldwRSaVKyqtiO/d5M+uYtF0dN4Tnp+Zj1XEsL6n WWjfOZBCnD8jODGntPAg==
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=google.com; s=beta; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; b=U4GwPrbduOFpmPsdc7keO90+mzuJZA4dC0BWZ5gDIBA+iyVNZ+pn06/phlx3xuT5ko b6rHqUOxDKwjb6LmLyUQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.78.96 with SMTP id j32mr355032qck.121.1307614731553; Thu, 09 Jun 2011 03:18:51 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: dilmah@google.com
Received: by 10.229.18.69 with HTTP; Thu, 9 Jun 2011 03:18:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=mEDLtuPJsc6eJThr-QUuKSFH-dw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110608173012.14596.50398.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <BANLkTi=mEDLtuPJsc6eJThr-QUuKSFH-dw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2011 14:18:51 +0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: Lc_iZBA54AnRi2NytOZwVmI-Ui0
Message-ID: <BANLkTikmnMZ+e0Pv6L5F3aEj0u0mXC6FOX+ARaS0eoGitJ3WqQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Denis Lagno <dilmah@chromium.org>
To: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-System-Of-Record: true
Cc: hybi@ietf.org, Internet-Drafts@ietf.org, i-d-announce@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [hybi] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-08.txt
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi>
List-Post: <mailto:hybi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2011 10:18:55 -0000

Draft specifies that ABNF for value of "Sec-WebSocket-Protocol" field
is 1#token.
First nit is that looking at definition of # rule in RFC2616 it
specifies that 1#token can contain Linear White Space, and LWS can
contain CRLF; I guess CRLF in subprotocols list is not expected?
Second nit is that it is not ABNF, ABNF RFC does not contain # rule.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email