IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] Handshake was: The WebSocket protocol issues.

Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com> Tue, 12 October 2010 19:58 UTC

Return-Path: <mcmanus@ducksong.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 C4DE43A6A74 for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 12:58:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.617
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.617 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.018, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 Pyk2dGCaAfsz for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 12:58:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from linode.ducksong.com (linode.ducksong.com [64.22.125.164]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C6853A67FA for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 12:58:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by linode.ducksong.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8B8FA102A5; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 15:59:12 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [192.168.16.226] (cpe-67-253-92-25.maine.res.rr.com [67.253.92.25]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by linode.ducksong.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BBDC710157; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 15:59:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
In-Reply-To: <20101012192700.GH23594@1wt.eu>
References: <4CAFA043.10101@caucho.com> <AANLkTi=eo-cjBz160FN0cn53v4-CpDSYaEneqkr_ZP7k@mail.gmail.com> <4CAFAC2B.5000800@caucho.com> <55bva61goeqtn0lifgjt5uihf50obh7kf4@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de> <4CAFB9C4.6030905@caucho.com> <AANLkTinv5Ym5jwUEqS76z3UkVa7GpmOBT_WXhBbFK0-m@mail.gmail.com> <20101009055723.GL4712@1wt.eu> <AANLkTimY2DjxgZybibSRtc7L34Wns2KhQC=Wa9K6PYku@mail.gmail.com> <20101009204009.GP4712@1wt.eu> <1286909730.2924.1992.camel@ds9.ducksong.com> <20101012192700.GH23594@1wt.eu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 15:58:55 -0400
Message-ID: <1286913535.2924.2009.camel@ds9.ducksong.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: hybi <hybi@ietf.org>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Subject: Re: [hybi] Handshake was: The WebSocket protocol issues.
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: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 19:58:01 -0000

On Tue, 2010-10-12 at 21:27 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Hi Patrick,
> 
> On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 02:55:30PM -0400, Patrick McManus wrote:
> > On Sat, 2010-10-09 at 22:40 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:

> > 
> > Unfortunately, Willy, I do buy it. I think I may have even implemented
> > such a server :(
> 
> Interesting. Thanks for publicly admitting it. However, I hope that
> your server did not return a 200 in response to a CONNECT request ?

It did not, because it was not that kind of proxy (it was a transforming
proxy of sorts in the SOAP and XML Web Services space) - it probably
returned 501 but I don't really recall for sure. There are lots of them
still in use, but none on the public Internet that I am aware of. (I'm
no longer with that employer.)

But it was a proxy (I know I said server - but I didn't say origin
server :)) and certainly it would have been reasonable to setup a valid
tunnel with a 200 in response to a well formed and configured-policy
valid CONNECT request if that functionality would have been useful.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email