Re: [hybi] New mailing list: hybi (HTTP "long poll" and related protocols)

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Mon, 30 March 2009 21:35 UTC

Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
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 50C743A6BB9 for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 14:35:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.589
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.589 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.010, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 utIVKsg6DW-g for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 14:35:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dizzyd.com (dizzyd.com [207.210.219.225]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DAA73A6D64 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 14:35:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wrk126.corp.jabber.com (dencfw1.jabber.com [207.182.164.5]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by dizzyd.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 49461E8002; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 15:36:46 -0600 (MDT)
Message-ID: <49D13B6D.7030403@stpeter.im>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 15:36:45 -0600
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Macintosh/20081209)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
References: <67830A60-4ACD-4646-9C46-9B168E7D305A@mnot.net> <Pine.LNX.4.62.0903301933210.25058@hixie.dreamhostps.com> <49D127BD.80203@stpeter.im> <Pine.LNX.4.62.0903302023121.25058@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0903302023121.25058@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7
OpenPGP: url=http://www.saint-andre.com/me/stpeter.asc
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"; boundary="------------ms030300060400020901000703"
Cc: hybi@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [hybi] New mailing list: hybi (HTTP "long poll" and related protocols)
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: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 21:35:49 -0000

On 3/30/09 3:24 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Mar 2009, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>> I notice the description of the list is "Server-Initiated HTTP", while 
>>> at least some of the techniques proposed, in particular Web Socket, 
>>> are only tangentially related to HTTP (WebSocket is a client-initiated 
>>> Web-aware bidirectional socket, it's not server-initiated and the HTTP 
>>> aspect is just an optional bootstrapping mechanism). Is the scope 
>>> intended to include or exclude long-term discussion of such solutions?
>> It's not clear to me what you mean by "scope". This is just a mailing 
>> list, it doesn't set requirements for anything.
> 
> I just meant with respect to what was "on-topic" vs what was "off-topic". 
> e.g. presumably discussion of what my cats were up to this morning is not 
> in scope for this mailing list. :-)

I don't run this list, so I'm not the canonical source of information,
but I would think that *at least* the four technologies we discussed at
the AppArea Open Meeting (Bayeux, BOSH, Reverse HTTP, and Web Sockets)
are in scope. If there are other such technologies in play or under
development, I suppose they would be in scope as well. As I see it, part
of what we're doing here is mapping out the problem space, so we need to
talk about what folks are working on.

>>> Also, what is the process by which discussion on this list can result 
>>> in a standards-track document?
>> That would be the Internet Standards Process: RFC 2026.
>>
>> The basic idea is that people who are interested in this space might 
>> work to organize a BOF at a future IETF meeting with the purpose of 
>> chartering a working group. As input to the BOF, those people would 
>> publish some Internet-Drafts that define requirements, best practices, 
>> use cases, and the like. (See my notes on the "breakfast BOF" that we 
>> held last week.) That might lead to formation of a working group and 
>> official charter items. And so on.
> 
> Woah. Ok, good to know. I guess we better get started then. :-)

You betcha!

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/