Re: [hybi] consensus call: websocketprotocol baseline

Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com> Fri, 07 May 2010 14:31 UTC

Return-Path: <gregw@webtide.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 75D543A6AB2 for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 May 2010 07:31:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.405
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.405 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.406, BAYES_50=0.001]
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 6BuVIZN-wabz for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 May 2010 07:31:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ww0-f44.google.com (mail-ww0-f44.google.com [74.125.82.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00AFC3A6B29 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 May 2010 07:31:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wwd20 with SMTP id 20so91749wwd.31 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Fri, 07 May 2010 07:31:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.227.135.6 with SMTP id l6mr131745wbt.60.1273242663798; Fri, 07 May 2010 07:31:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.100] (host116-234-static.43-88-b.business.telecomitalia.it [88.43.234.116]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id x34sm10634662wbd.16.2010.05.07.07.31.01 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 07 May 2010 07:31:01 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4BE4241B.7060906@webtide.com>
Date: Fri, 07 May 2010 16:30:51 +0200
From: Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20100411)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: hybi@ietf.org
References: <4BE41BCB.7010707@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <4BE41BCB.7010707@ericsson.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [hybi] consensus call: websocketprotocol baseline
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, 07 May 2010 14:31:23 -0000

Sal,

As I'm sure you can guess, my preference is for 75 over 76,
because of the non HTTP compliant issues (not because
of breaking changes).

However, I do recognize that there is also much goodness in
76 that we don't really want to lose or even revisit.

So I'd like to suggest a third alternative for consensus:
that Ian prepare a 77 draft, based on 76, but with the handshake
reverted to the 75 handshake.

77 can become version 0 of the WG draft and we can immediately
resume discussion on the two issues that the new handshake is
trying to address:

  1 protection from injectable servers
  2 "fast" fail semantics on connection.

I'm sure we can quickly come to agreement on something for
the first issue.   We should then make every effort to solve
the second issue without out breaking the compliance with HTTP.
If we cannot, then we have to determine which requirement is
more important: HTTP compliance or "fast" fail (or if any
solution can actually achieve reliable "fast" fail).

regards












Salvatore Loreto wrote:
>  
> During the last IETF 77 the wg decided to use the version 75th to be
> adopted as official wg item.
>  
> That was due to the fact all the already shipped implementation (e.g.
> chrome, kaazing, jetty)
> are currently based on the 75th version of the draft.
> The idea was to start with a -00 version that matches what people
> shipped and then discuss what to put in -01 version.
> Another reason to adopt 75th version, was that there were no official
> 76th version at the time.
>  
> ( Ian yesterday submitted to the IETF the 76th version of the draft:
> _http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-hixie-thewebsocketprotocol-76.txt_ )
>  
>  
> During the last weeks there as been a lot of discussion about 75th vs 76th,
> and it seems that people do not think that breaking changes are a big
> problem at this stage.
>  
>  
> So as chairs we want to check the consensus for which version (75th or
> 76th) adopt as baseline of
> official HyBi wg item: draft-ietf-websocketprotocol-00.
> 
> The consensus call will run until May 14th, 2010.
> 
> Then we will ask Ian Hixie to submit the version that has received the
> consensus has wg item.
>  
> 
> best regards
> /Sal
> 
> -- 
> Salvatore Loreto
> www.sloreto.com
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> hybi mailing list
> hybi@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi