Re: [hybi] Protocol simplicity and the "amateur programmer" standard

Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com> Mon, 26 July 2010 15:29 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@adambarth.com>
X-Original-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E7F83A6ACA for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 08:29:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.694
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.694 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.283, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JTRotZgx5wZF for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 08:29:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vw0-f44.google.com (mail-vw0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D67213A6A75 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 08:29:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vws10 with SMTP id 10so2702119vws.31 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 08:29:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.59.202 with SMTP id m10mr4046905vch.193.1280158167492; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 08:29:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gy0-f172.google.com (mail-gy0-f172.google.com [209.85.160.172]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id w1sm1880246vbl.18.2010.07.26.08.29.24 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 26 Jul 2010 08:29:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by gyg8 with SMTP id 8so1067915gyg.31 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 08:29:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.150.144.13 with SMTP id r13mr9261626ybd.45.1280158163708; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 08:29:23 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.231.79.85 with HTTP; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 08:29:03 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4C4DA92D.8010105@opera.com>
References: <ECF0E97F-1DA2-4662-BA48-F68B65AA8179@apple.com> <4C4D66AF.9030905@opera.com> <DAA95AEE-300E-4C2D-BBCA-02D0385EE482@apple.com> <4C4D760A.9060906@opera.com> <C1B1A36F-55E1-4526-B535-3F9CF27F1EB7@brandedcode.com> <AANLkTikWb1w5PrH2XoB4kVHY+u=BZxwh1Bm3oPwdZhbf@mail.gmail.com> <4C4DA92D.8010105@opera.com>
From: Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 17:29:03 +0200
Message-ID: <AANLkTikobVGTxbs3XqLv25WXd9VkZtB4vmxUJGc5uwE1@mail.gmail.com>
To: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: hybi@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [hybi] Protocol simplicity and the "amateur programmer" standard
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 15:29:10 -0000

On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 5:26 PM, James Graham <jgraham@opera.com> wrote:
> On 07/26/2010 05:10 PM, Greg Wilkins wrote:
>> I do not think the "we've shipped it so you have to rubber stamp it as
>> an ietf protocol" is an winning argument.
>
> To be clear, my argument was intended to focus on market realities. If
> browsers stay on their current course, a version of WebSockets much like the
> -76 draft will, assuming it is not a complete failure, be a de-facto part of
> the web platform within a short timescale, irrespective of what the IETF
> does.

To be clear: we've had representatives of Apple and Google state
explicitly on this list that they are planning to rev their
implementations of WebSockets.  No one is asking the IETF to rubber
stamp anything.

Adam