IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] name symtax, was: WebSocket sub protocol name.

Thomas Broyer <t.broyer@ltgt.net> Sat, 19 December 2009 02:04 UTC

Return-Path: <t.broyer@gmail.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 869523A6805 for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 18:04:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.477
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.477 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.500, 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 zLVpOChHfLdg for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 18:04:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-bw0-f223.google.com (mail-bw0-f223.google.com [209.85.218.223]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 994553A67F5 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 18:04:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: by bwz23 with SMTP id 23so2606041bwz.29 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 18:04:08 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=uZv8oFe6Mkn21cydd/wE4sr3TtanIMErxGVR8dQ5Fw4=; b=nkA/wEoGyIoY2JfGBVHFwp4Pf2WKWgnffmWNlnRVaxnio3G9d3A0iJEjp/3kwM+7Yc EkuBL17yMcaBKiKhvqUoG9LrFc6/aVx8YCxDyVH22YZf4T3JX1RZDMLPUt3dp2w58RT9 /BkQG4A02nEpHxJfv0ZpYW3o77evaF+4BA58w=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=HquGVhig/CzFaveQBsBt47cM9cZkm5xXIdF/GBkE62nM6EuTBeoQBDQY2WP9X8p3NM SMsrfC8/RvOgy4+ll6wp7rhHGwrSGk77JxVSrFy0HkHoGWDcQ/iMRvqsDOjx110NL7hj Z+SloJ8PZnBEpAQnu2fVLLmnYVd2wVpdKS0+s=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: t.broyer@gmail.com
Received: by 10.204.24.65 with SMTP id u1mr2837955bkb.176.1261188248574; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 18:04:08 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <4B2B8FEA.4010102@gmx.de>
References: <de17d48e0912062058u72db7455x4e211cb05da19070@mail.gmail.com> <4B1E22AC.9080507@gmx.de> <Pine.LNX.4.62.0912080958180.16061@hixie.dreamhostps.com> <5821ea240912080354h40fb5ce1xf6fb2d4b9c96cdaa@mail.gmail.com> <a9699fd20912080732j1fc3a0ebuc0a3d4fc06790480@mail.gmail.com> <5821ea240912080807o25e7cddamd94969861d3f19fe@mail.gmail.com> <4B2B4DD7.2080107@gmx.de> <5821ea240912180415g1f6704b5ha022ba7cf347fe2f@mail.gmail.com> <a9699fd20912180612t26eaaf41labd3e145f47d62d6@mail.gmail.com> <4B2B8FEA.4010102@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2009 03:04:08 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 8d6802d47484fb36
Message-ID: <a9699fd20912181804r197298f4w7f52c8c32614c770@mail.gmail.com>
From: Thomas Broyer <t.broyer@ltgt.net>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: hybi@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [hybi] name symtax, was: WebSocket sub protocol name.
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: Sat, 19 Dec 2009 02:04:28 -0000

On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> Thomas Broyer wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Pieter Hintjens wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm struggling to digest the logic that allows nulls (and spaces) but
>>> not colons in a "name"...
>>
>> Because colons (and CRs and LFs) are used as separators?
>> If nulls (and spaces) have no single role and/or processing rule, why
>> shuold they be ruled out?
>
> Maybe because otherwise people using NUL-terminated strings *will*
> misimplement this?
>
>> ...
>> Now, could we move on the discussion about the protocol itself rather
>> than nitpicking, please?
>> ...
>
> With all due to respect, this isn't nitpicking but a serious concern.

Point taken.

How about ruling out U+00, and treat it as if it were an "error in
UTF-8" in case you actually receive one (§4.4 and §5.4 in -68)?

-- 
Thomas Broyer
/tɔ.ma.bʁwa.je/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email