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

Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> Thu, 21 July 2011 23:27 UTC

Return-Path: <ibc@aliax.net>
X-Original-To: hybi@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA83811E8078; Thu, 21 Jul 2011 16:27:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.67
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.67 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.007, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nDVc6EqeA+9o; Thu, 21 Jul 2011 16:27:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qw0-f44.google.com (mail-qw0-f44.google.com [209.85.216.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31A4111E8071; Thu, 21 Jul 2011 16:27:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qwc23 with SMTP id 23so1430653qwc.31 for <multiple recipients>; Thu, 21 Jul 2011 16:27:20 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.77.38 with SMTP id e38mr751382qck.151.1311290840508; Thu, 21 Jul 2011 16:27:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.185.195 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Jul 2011 16:27:20 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAP992=Ec3KvAerosLNkJCTNzFniRfU-bFg_7=bAiMOJFarb5zA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110711140229.17432.23519.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CALiegfk0zVVRBbOP4ugsVXKmcLnryujP6DZqF6Bu_dC2C3PpeQ@mail.gmail.com> <9031.1311082001.631622@puncture> <CALiegfk_GLAhAf=yEe6hYw2bwtxEwg9aJN+f0Bm9he5QgsRavA@mail.gmail.com> <CAP992=Ft6NwG+rbcuWUP0npwVNHY_znHmXmznBQO_krMo3RT6g@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegfmTWMP3GhS1-k2aoHHXkUkB+eWqV=2+BufuWVR1s2Z-EA@mail.gmail.com> <20110721163910.GA16854@1wt.eu> <CAP992=FrX5VxP2o0JLNoJs8nXXba7wbZ6RN9wBUYC0ZSN_wbAg@mail.gmail.com> <9031.1311270000.588511@puncture> <CALiegf=pYzybvc7WB2QfPg6FKrhLxgzHuP-DpuuMfZYJV6Z7FQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAP992=FJymFPKcPVWrF-LkcEtNUz=Kt9L_ex+kLtjiGjL1T46w@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegfnGkypkJYxUGGm3Tddgk3D0Ri=EWtN0WMChhEZN3Xsauw@mail.gmail.com> <CAP992=FrnDrCLgqZGUO9R2WkfgA2D+8TCau=6Xi+xa_u3CXT2w@mail.gmail.com> <9031.1311279546.247694@puncture> <CAP992=Ec3KvAerosLNkJCTNzFniRfU-bFg_7=bAiMOJFarb5zA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 01:27:20 +0200
Message-ID: <CALiegfktEh3fjd_uHH_uVdo498xUoqxaYvXrzFQkFQbeafw1GQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?I=C3=B1aki_Baz_Castillo?= <ibc@aliax.net>
To: David Endicott <dendicott@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi@ietf.org>, IETF-Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [hybi] Last Call: <draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-10.txt> (The WebSocket protocol) to Proposed Standard
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 23:27:22 -0000

2011/7/21 David Endicott <dendicott@gmail.com>om>:
> Do they?   A http uri and a ws uri have the same host/path construction.
>  It's really only the scheme that differs - and that identifies the
> transport protocol to be used.   Resolution of host name/addresses and
> mapping of paths "should" be consistent.
> WS is a connection that is semantically related to the URI of the request.
>
> e.g. I could ws://host/davesaid  and get live traffic of what Dave is
> saying, and then I could ws://host/bobsaid  and get traffic of what Bob
> says.  I wouldn't get Bob on /davesaid and I wouldn't get Dave on /bobsaid.
>    Dynamic content identified by a URI
> And if I http://host/davesaid  I could get a <li> of what Dave said.
> Static content of a URI.
> It could be problematic if  ws://host/davesaid resolves to a different
> address than http://host/davesaid.     (Or it could be advantage - not for
> us to decide, however)

David, this does not make sense at all. Let see this case:

a) mailto:alice@google.com
b) xmpp:alice@google.com
c) sip:alice@google,com
d) http://google.com
e) ws://google.com

Do you really expect that all those URI's should point to the same
server??? not, right? then, why e) should behave like d)?

And of course, protocols defining a kind of URI (specific for such
protocol) CAN and probably MUST also define how to locate such URI
destination. In case of http just poor A/AAAA is done, but in other
cases we all do know that other kind of DNS queries are done.

-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc@aliax.net>