IETF Logo Mail Archive

[hybi] Straw poll: Do you miss interjectable WebSocket level control frame? (was: Re: Discontinuation of mux ...)

Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com> Wed, 19 February 2014 04:19 UTC

Return-Path: <tyoshino@google.com>
X-Original-To: hybi@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19B9E1A032C for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 20:19:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.926
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.926 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id X5p1wwqEAKDO for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 20:19:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wi0-x22f.google.com (mail-wi0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C4371A0325 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 20:19:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wi0-f175.google.com with SMTP id hm4so4233578wib.8 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 20:19:38 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=+rIMY+BpcazRF+EAPEXzZXUtXECHYMEe3rmyNJDqwLE=; b=cja5WpxjWECs+ON74UfMjCVqEZtaqv/JU+RZ4mhd7nPw8LmLs/Je8uAG1a/DwFAyAI UPB3LIMVfJ3grAVIO39/Tfa6QL/obS9W+b48pADj6OCbMeVPRhf4kz4FDy9JtmKXFGa2 xAtgGVii4LZLENnzTYMNF5qf9kM+N8Ue4mwvFmJWOmisSQGMPBnoOKnanxUsJRBxvaI2 WVtI98K9LZzytRvc2yPUkbHzuD83T96r9skubGOAd+9LmvY8Zwy3PudZY/i0JoIKQeNh 72AvYWrbMJZq9AvUp8T0GTqejMM6ZVHlUZwjjiwzGF3np6gqVGP7nuQJPLTYIT+UkqiC awIA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=+rIMY+BpcazRF+EAPEXzZXUtXECHYMEe3rmyNJDqwLE=; b=QDTd89N8gebeCq9hfgZlOM2hxK1IBz+Hj0w3VStIZVoYCEko3nsjadhurVOCNKF60d Mmxved53AIzd1c5EcCGA2+PipFIA3Tp3YKkKT9dQ58rqBa0JAm3AcAWx7+RAS+oPoMS3 VmtrXYZ1tplSrSMKtKHLV/KGx1yEf3dLChkow39G8t+JGbYmARihCaAgCJN//mAh4DWb TQwfk9HGt25AjXwYNJxU8nQK4dltLXybZ9Os9pz58Wi5rimZ1DM0FfJo0aHKU2fc9W9J 1Xao3zvXwYkWvdGJROq8qKWA+QtztsTSFnfGAAoDvkjyyvNEGZRm68f+MNXjJhQqKOAF JuUw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnRYpD9/e6fLmQyABe33nXeG0yYw5hU120HlXZT4+S4OHp8AJL0Ahc2RbChpmsvzlPCgMMtyOz/WtKLKl1HCN0TbqHk4yA6E/5meM3M0AAXBjV5SdeTlYgcpGGa0/8oOx9FRL1ikAI3QJT72Gs0cmSiO8DHK3bHGZswWUx7KTT9Bp87TmXcLT6nf11OXnO3Po4hSBbV
X-Received: by 10.194.61.114 with SMTP id o18mr21451326wjr.6.1392783578867; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 20:19:38 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.194.8.231 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 20:19:18 -0800 (PST)
From: Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 13:19:18 +0900
Message-ID: <CAH9hSJbjQNKnZTJmBFtU8MgmnRTYjPopC4oP_78bWUGap-9CvA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Yutaka Hirano <yhirano@google.com>, Tobias Oberstein <tobias.oberstein@tavendo.de>, Peter Thorson <webmaster@zaphoyd.com>, Roberto Peon <fenix@google.com>, "hybi@ietf.org" <hybi@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7bacc8a677c19804f2bab20a"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hybi/A7HExBApOY-_Gndwi7nbyJ7lPrk
Subject: [hybi] Straw poll: Do you miss interjectable WebSocket level control frame? (was: Re: Discontinuation of mux ...)
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 04:19:45 -0000

It seems we're using "RFC 6455 Semantics" with a bit different nuance. I'd
like to divide the discussion into more primitive questions.

The second point I want to hear your opinion is: "do you miss interjectable
WebSocket level control frame?"

Since RFC 6455's control frames can be interjected in the middle of a data
message, to keep this as-is, we need to prevent FRAME boundary from being
modified by multiplexing mechanism. Possible solutions are:
- encapsulate WebSocket frame
- prepare some mechanism (HTTP/2.0 frame type) in HTTP/2.0 layer similar to
HTTP/2.0 PING frame that provides a box to which we can map WebSocket level
control (PING/PONG/CLOSE/and other reserved control opcodes)

Please respond to this thread with your answer and rationale.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email