IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] Clarify the role of closing handshake

Andy Green <andy@warmcat.com> Mon, 14 February 2011 20:37 UTC

Return-Path: <andy.warmcat.com@googlemail.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 6D40E3A6C4E for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Feb 2011 12:37:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 oDC217Tzl48k for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Feb 2011 12:37:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ew0-f44.google.com (mail-ew0-f44.google.com [209.85.215.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F8663A6AD5 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Feb 2011 12:37:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: by ewy8 with SMTP id 8so2845837ewy.31 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Feb 2011 12:37:44 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent :mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=fnlx3Xw1M18gCP2/5UycNEsTvhjr6sL6kFIHQM4z4ao=; b=EeHHF4QrnhC3yWm7I5wY5wS2ulHIl65sL8VhQw2qW1Nxz5oEp2z8ZHkbDtvfNGz85z bE2XO6oraKB8wYDVWOIkD16YUtb5PLIZFJ6corKVsdJk7+P2GPb+bGC6GN9qJIrAr4Do z1zicjsQB0wmtN2cN7uyFSOzXfh2ZDzDfETjc=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=wYB/W9GgBFElj5XmjtQdlzsAH0xzrii0QSHqHK7w6JqfD6bEdlvXmFpVQFC9hX0P9b Fe2wt5yR2nstSLk+WyZtVb4Z1XN4tx+sS4brSOM9XCyBxf9Y/RvVlIHNbzXHTDommF9C /EAYJ01rKRVTiOccD6UV4B6RGZziDg+yZlvK4=
Received: by 10.213.9.130 with SMTP id l2mr555569ebl.72.1297715863932; Mon, 14 Feb 2011 12:37:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from otae.warmcat.com (cpc1-nrte21-2-0-cust677.8-4.cable.virginmedia.com [81.111.78.166]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id x54sm2828399eeh.5.2011.02.14.12.37.42 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 14 Feb 2011 12:37:43 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Andy Green <andy.warmcat.com@googlemail.com>
Message-ID: <4D599296.7020803@warmcat.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 20:37:42 +0000
From: Andy Green <andy@warmcat.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101217 Fedora/3.1.7-0.39.b3pre.fc15 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com>
References: <AANLkTi=wAwQHGbu_vVS5o9yNuC-M=e_hWwtU5F6UPGqm@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimGHPmGSB1hCr2VJ3O8bFJiEkvdkvqptt6A8mBA@mail.gmail.com> <CA566BAEAD6B3F4E8B5C5C4F61710C1126E04F34@TK5EX14MBXW605.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com> <AANLkTimRezbkgnicmSqhX+Go5UYAazTU9WWHpH8oe_7K@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinh1jUbei-FhMAkRcGoT9-z7RJQv4Q_7DweiwcL@mail.gmail.com> <7785FB1F-C733-4AE1-BACF-44556B1074A8@gmail.com> <AANLkTinfcj-rYiv4vDUBz3cmRqALttq61=hb0mC41L9h@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTikHf00MhSPXhfjDv9MuG=tMQ6V3FG2VvGoV+o-8@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTi=O6peLVFks-+phmQ=MTtrXddixj5_LYKvg6xWv@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=O6peLVFks-+phmQ=MTtrXddixj5_LYKvg6xWv@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "hybi@ietf.org" <hybi@ietf.org>, Gabriel Montenegro <Gabriel.Montenegro@microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: [hybi] Clarify the role of closing handshake
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, 14 Feb 2011 20:37:22 -0000

On 02/14/2011 07:49 PM, Somebody in the thread at some point said:

> This must be aligned with what discussed on another thread about opening
> handshake status code. Having very similar code for two purposes can be
> confusing.

Well I don't mind what is decided in either case, but to be clear in the 
opening handshake case it's in http protocol and using http conventions, 
even the server response is valid http.  So it uses http status concept.

But in the close case all that is long gone and it's websocket protocol 
which is totally different from http conventions.  So it seems it would 
be OK if it uses a different status concept if it wants to use any 
status concept at all at websocket close time.

-Andy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email