Re: [hybi] Call for interest: multiplexing dedicated for WebSocket

Simone Bordet <sbordet@intalio.com> Sun, 19 May 2013 18:37 UTC

Return-Path: <simone.bordet@gmail.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 ABE9321F87C5 for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 19 May 2013 11:37:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PDnXB1j3RNCA for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 19 May 2013 11:37:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pb0-x22c.google.com (mail-pb0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C38E121F8733 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Sun, 19 May 2013 11:37:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pb0-f44.google.com with SMTP id wz12so459145pbc.3 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Sun, 19 May 2013 11:37:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=usSgSCHsCOzVIdRRtQy+KNFE5dN4msDVSs31qrH+hsw=; b=poMyP6lPMtNvZOC/nUH724u9W3PQ07vOMhl5qBirHVapw1XkXPYha6YLFN9LgeL7SZ dHMXEl6mqI1xLePtrNv81fSu58MMcts3jIp3N0La1avI6X8eNWXbdJqQeXUo0qMoyKLg VGUqGlZHH3/SsmqI/OOdYG+vYNg2hnmw7AuU3d+eQfBYwX0tG7KOZ3lLF2hUtu4gSvff fG9R8TfOkdQGcHITMv2NvrwVZFFplKMkEuK88U6d9I1RO7BdXy72fsqxNo7CtKC6Vk2x 9RB9mSruKX/R5t46NK3ja+2xpjNCbWCGawean2/X8gAlX7HruB38V8XM3Sy3nbJSgf73 hdJQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.66.235.69 with SMTP id uk5mr39703480pac.110.1368988633248; Sun, 19 May 2013 11:37:13 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: simone.bordet@gmail.com
Received: by 10.68.103.129 with HTTP; Sun, 19 May 2013 11:37:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAH9hSJZai_UuxW4O6mZcEJT2DJoURtLo16XNci1qkYVWv4HVdg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAH9hSJZxr+aG7GZa4f-dUOTGj4bnJ+3XxivUX4jei5CMyqN4LQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAH9hSJZUG1f+3Uk=t2=A5i4O9=wPvAisspM=pgmGEH9emTL9-Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAH9hSJZai_UuxW4O6mZcEJT2DJoURtLo16XNci1qkYVWv4HVdg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 19 May 2013 20:37:13 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: BahVMXytH0B0Xfuz92okx77Z_5k
Message-ID: <CAFWmRJ0naLw=Om70ag3p2xJ8mYvgNHLL6Z_DtpiOjVWZ3iS5Dg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Simone Bordet <sbordet@intalio.com>
To: Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: "hybi@ietf.org" <hybi@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [hybi] Call for interest: multiplexing dedicated for WebSocket
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Sun, 19 May 2013 18:37:14 -0000

Hi,

On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com> wrote:
> I got one comment about this.
>
> He/she suggested that we finish the WebSocket dedicated multiplexing quickly
> even by simplifying the spec much e.g. cutting some functionality in it that
> would take much time to get consensus, and when HTTP/2.0 is matured, switch
> to that.

My impression is that I have not seen much request for WebSocket multiplexing.
Given the complexities related to defining and implementing ws mux
correctly, and considering that HTTP/2.0 comes with mux built-in,
building on the SPDY experience, my preference would be to
deprioritize ws mux in favour of HTTP/2.0 integration.
It is true that there may be systems that may rely on a pure-ws
communication (and therefore do not need a full HTTP/2.0
implementation) and as such would benefit from ws mux, but my guess is
that those system will be a minority or can get by without ws mux. I
may be biased on this view though, so comments welcome.

Thanks !

--
Simone Bordet
----
http://cometd.org
http://webtide.com
http://intalio.com
Developer advice, training, services and support
from the Jetty & CometD experts.
Intalio, the modern way to build business applications.