Re: [hybi] I-D Action: draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-09.txt

Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) <ifette@google.com> Tue, 21 June 2011 05:01 UTC

Return-Path: <ifette@google.com>
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 BC83611E809D for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 22:01:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.557
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.557 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.119, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 TsSMGlhwQoak for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 22:01:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (smtp-out.google.com [74.125.121.67]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9B9511E8081 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 22:01:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kpbe11.cbf.corp.google.com (kpbe11.cbf.corp.google.com [172.25.105.75]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id p5L51MJf004962 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 22:01:22 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1308632483; bh=+MPKnH1kRmcb++Lt5hxqQArHiak=; h=MIME-Version:Reply-To:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: Subject:From:To:Cc:Content-Type; b=d2HlQ86i8+hZ/D4ce23JUtOilmvE25attst9lUAudhkWC2oRUAu30HQqRZcqNg/aq Rd1zBa7uYT4cvhfo31RhA==
Received: from iyl8 (iyl8.prod.google.com [10.241.51.200]) by kpbe11.cbf.corp.google.com with ESMTP id p5L51LEM008807 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for <hybi@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 22:01:21 -0700
Received: by iyl8 with SMTP id 8so5870038iyl.14 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 22:01:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=UHez+sc4oyaQHH7x9iTVtsrhjc5kA+++ZXopFdmz87k=; b=IGYTe9fQB+oSby6G4disddrEBsqis/dkiX+CkvXKGUDKHoUb0WlMs63r0t7gaCQzcp HZGgluYlNdKg5fbVTbGw==
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=google.com; s=beta; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; b=rnJvtaro9K5TEmlvj+zUyX4JgeBvYQIxQyPqij18EVrGXDU+4Jhj3Hstwy9Fp6shwX Uf7OCmFQJ+aXv3LA8WAA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.231.41.69 with SMTP id n5mr6110645ibe.83.1308632480780; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 22:01:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.231.33.8 with HTTP; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 22:01:20 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=EW7squxBQafU+WkBH0ooK_b3J-A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110613233745.27187.94588.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <BANLkTinWuzj3V12eerjX0f13yYNdynTOjQ@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTikwcqZJu+YJS_Tk0cTEpHmdOd0naA@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTi=EW7squxBQafU+WkBH0ooK_b3J-A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 22:01:20 -0700
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=PQZG5nGihX0bam9qNVP84BnCcBQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?SWFuIEZldHRlICjjgqTjgqLjg7Pjg5Xjgqfjg4Pjg4bjgqMp?= <ifette@google.com>
To: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015177407d428914804a631be09
X-System-Of-Record: true
Cc: hybi@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [hybi] I-D Action: draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-09.txt
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: ifette@google.com
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: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 05:01:24 -0000

I think that we should keep it, but I don't think we should force it to 1.0
or anything. I think we should just leave it at 8 (or at a later version if
that's necessitated).

-Ian

2011/6/20 Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>

> 2011/6/21 Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) <ifette@google.com>om>:
> > The request MUST include a header with the name "Sec-WebSocket-
> >         Version".  The value of this header MUST be 8. _Note: Although a
> >         draft -09 was published, as -09 was comprised of editorial
> >         changes and not changes to the wire protocol, 9 was not used as
> >         a valid value for Sec-WebSocket-Version.  This value was
> >         reserved in the IANA registry but was not and will not be used.
>
>
> oops - I just saw that.
>
> However we still need to decide if/when we will be dropping this field
> or converting it to something like
>
>   Sec-WebSocket-Version: 1.0
>
> I know some think versioning is an anti pattern, but it has proved
> invaluable in handling multiple client versions.
>
>
> cheers
>