IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] Random Responses

Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net> Fri, 10 April 2009 19:56 UTC

Return-Path: <prescod@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 C23FD3A6985 for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Apr 2009 12:56:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.628
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.628 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.349, 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 ebOm7P+K6mZI for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Apr 2009 12:56:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com (rv-out-0506.google.com [209.85.198.238]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E37833A6A68 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Apr 2009 12:55:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id k40so977779rvb.49 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Apr 2009 12:57:06 -0700 (PDT)
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=a3F9hvf+GTNPl7al79911X9LdBkorbeeFRewxpd54JQ=; b=E1N53lKYT4eCPrpGdWcZotjDNOofBI24e5HiAK0cGlHID5ge3DqOxJ6sSMXDAG/Zpw a4moMcGYVdKAglqVtTZLrNTE7wkLEYxqFx4feZ44RDP/P24eR6hLmuWp5ecs24N27DeG zKROD6EiH7BEE5FqCO1hJ1KHuoGAGLhSBoRX4=
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=LXAjbLraERQT2h2QpwbRth7CfcBSnvi6iEdEuhX78HPUSB82SLUDay62DzKi/PibdV kT5AkLurylj5SuW+521sCS45gxhocyoMqG4/0R+2agLvOARTYx/OthQ4GvMZzGwdQDh1 hh8UW9pmduNC9lvpgJIz0O449Y7oqe29VEY8Y=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: prescod@gmail.com
Received: by 10.141.201.1 with SMTP id d1mr1600965rvq.142.1239393426730; Fri, 10 Apr 2009 12:57:06 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <8A829FEA-0EF2-46D6-974D-0EB237FF2728@lindenlab.com>
References: <8A829FEA-0EF2-46D6-974D-0EB237FF2728@lindenlab.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 12:57:06 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: c4673120d3930375
Message-ID: <1cb725390904101257q57828e37t1b7a6d135fcce739@mail.gmail.com>
From: Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net>
To: Mark Lentczner <markl@lindenlab.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: hybi@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [hybi] Random Responses
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: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 19:56:35 -0000

On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Mark Lentczner <markl@lindenlab.com> wrote:
> Sorry about the hodge-podge here: After IETF-74 I had a zillion things to do
> at work, so it wasn't until this morning that I was able to fully catch up
> on my backlog of reading hybi mail. Here are a number of bit-and-bobs that I
> wanted to reply to:
>
> the whole point of
> bidirectional communication is that it's not a request-response model.
>
> Actually, I don't agree. At Linden Lab, we've seen a great need for
> bidirectional communication that is request/response model.

I am curious what you typically put in responses to messages from the
"central server" to a browser running on an edge device.

I'd also be curious whether you expect the response to be provided by
Javascript or by an underlying layer that just says: "yeah, I got the
message: I'll pass it to Javascript when that thread is available."

As I think about it today I wonder if it is really helpful for the
server to wait for a response from the client, which it will typically
ignore (IMO).

 Paul Prescod

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email