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

Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> Sun, 24 July 2011 11:02 UTC

Return-Path: <w@1wt.eu>
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 62B1421F8997; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 04:02:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.272
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.272 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-3.229, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_IS_SMALL6=0.556]
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 zNXtfOoiupMe; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 04:02:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 1wt.eu (1wt.eu [62.212.114.60]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 927B521F887C; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 04:02:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from willy@localhost) by mail.home.local (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p6OB2mWB026172; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 13:02:48 +0200
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 13:02:48 +0200
From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
Message-ID: <20110724110248.GN22405@1wt.eu>
References: <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> <B2C17B21-EA8A-4698-8C41-F55A9AA140D4@gbiv.com> <20110724073323.EEAAF121E985@drugs.dv.isc.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20110724073323.EEAAF121E985@drugs.dv.isc.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Cc: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, 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: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 11:02:55 -0000

Hi Mark,

On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 05:33:23PM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote:
> 
> In message <B2C17B21-EA8A-4698-8C41-F55A9AA140D4@gbiv.com>om>, "Roy T. Fielding" writes:
> > On Jul 21, 2011, at 10:52 AM, I=F1aki Baz Castillo wrote:
> > 
> > > 2011/7/21 Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net>et>:
> > >> It's proven impossible, despite effort, to retrofit SRV onto HTTP; there=
> >  is
> > >> no way it'll be possible to retrofit onto WS.
> > > =
> > 
> > > Right. If WS borns with no SRV (as a MUST for WS clients) then just
> > > forget it and let inherit all the ugly limitations from HTTP protocol.
> > 
> > I am tired of this.  SRV is not used for HTTP because SRV adds latency
> > to the initial request for no useful purpose whatsoever.
> 
> How do you solve the problem of hosting just "http://example.com/"
> on "s1.joes-web-service.com" and not redirect everything else at
> example.com?  People have been complaining about this for about as
> long as the web has existed.

I would say that people complaining about this are doing the wrong thing
first. We've been using www.domain.tld, ftp.domain.tld, mail.domain.tld,
ns.domain.tld for ages, each indicating the service in their host name,
and suddenly just because www.domain.tld appears in the browser's address
bar, it should be shortened to show only "domain.tld". If people are doing
this, they must assume their choices. Sure, SRV would make that easier for
them, but it's not as if no solution had existed before.

Regards,
Willy