Re: [hybi] IESG note?, was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-10.txt> (The WebSocket protocol) to Proposed Standard

[Joel Martin <[e-mail]>]

On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 9:07 PM, Sylvain Hellegouarch <[e-mail]> wrote:

>  +1. I like that phrasing. It summarizes the requirements document pretty
>> well
>>
>
> Yet it never was worded that way when this WG started debating mainly WS.
> In fact, I don't recall any other protocol being discussed on this board so
> I disagree with the term "requirement" in this very case.
>
>
My point is that Willy's paragraph is a concise summary the current (and
original) requirements document for WebSockets and the HyBi charter too for
that matter:

Original WebSocket requirements doc:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-loreto-hybi-requirements-00
Current WebSocket requirements doc:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-hybi-websocket-requirements<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-hybi-websocket-requirements-02>

Original WebSocket charter:
http://tools.ietf.org/wg/hybi/charters?item=charter-hybi-2010-01-26.txt
Current WebSocket charter: http://www.ietf.org/dyn/wg/charter/hybi-charter

IMO, the current protocol design fits quite well with the HyBi charter and
WebSocket requirements. One could argue that the charter and requirements
document are flawed, but given the starting point, the current result has
almost fulfilled the original vision (the remaining item is wide adoption,
but that seems very likely assuming the WG work isn't derailed in the
meantime).

Regards,

Joel Martin