Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (Criteria) (was: WebSocket)
Salvatore Loreto <salvatore.loreto@ericsson.com> Tue, 27 October 2009 12:11 UTC
Return-Path: <salvatore.loreto@ericsson.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 C45B53A68EE for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 05:11:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.935
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.935 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.314, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 Iaj3qB-zRUBL for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 05:11:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw5.ericsson.se (mailgw5.ericsson.se [193.180.251.36]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CCB03A67D6 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 05:11:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb24-b7b12ae000007bda-b4-4ae6e3886a13
Received: from esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw5.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 1F.8F.31706.883E6EA4; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:11:53 +0100 (CET)
Received: from esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.174]) by esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:11:52 +0100
Received: from mail.lmf.ericsson.se ([131.160.11.50]) by esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:11:52 +0100
Received: from nomadiclab.lmf.ericsson.se (nomadiclab.lmf.ericsson.se [131.160.33.3]) by mail.lmf.ericsson.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AF0C24E3; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:11:52 +0200 (EET)
Received: from nomadiclab.lmf.ericsson.se (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nomadiclab.lmf.ericsson.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1B0C21A22; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:11:51 +0200 (EET)
Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nomadiclab.lmf.ericsson.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60D2121A21; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:11:51 +0200 (EET)
Message-ID: <4AE6E386.5020905@ericsson.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:11:50 +0200
From: Salvatore Loreto <salvatore.loreto@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090825)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: hybi@ietf.org
References: <4ADEC7A0.7040307@ericsson.com> <4AE4CCBB.10001@webtide.com> <FF38AF8B-95D7-479E-B6A2-20E3AC7EB6C9@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <FF38AF8B-95D7-479E-B6A2-20E3AC7EB6C9@mnot.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Oct 2009 12:11:52.0550 (UTC) FILETIME=[AB15E060:01CA56FE]
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
Subject: Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (Criteria) (was: WebSocket)
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: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 12:11:55 -0000
it seems to me that there are opportunity reasons (e.g. do a specific piece of work; the efforts people have spent during the last years on WS) but also some consensus on focus the WG long term solution on WebSocket protocol however what is not clear is *"what criteria that proposed changes to WS needs to meet"* (as suggested by Mark) so far Ian has followed a fairly strict set of criteria for changes to WS (from Ian mail: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi/current/msg00695.html); mainly - keep the protocol simple - specifically designed for JS clients - possibility to update it regularly without bootstrapping through intermediaries (Ian, please correct me if I have misinterpreted you) However there are people in the group that do think the criteria for changes should be less strict and also take in consideration intermediaries, infrastructure providers and/or even servers and also clients different from JS clients. So I'd like have a discussion in the mailing list about the criteria that proposed changes to WS need to meet cheers /Sal Mark Nottingham wrote: > My .02 (repeating some things that have been said by others) -- > > A WG that has a definite charter to do a specific piece of work has a > much greater chance of success than one that is tasked with picking a > winner; even if the WG fails as a whole or needs to be rechartered > later because it isn't working, it's much more productive to be > working on one identified thing. > > I think a charter for a WG along these lines needs to very carefully > spell out what criteria that proposed changes to WS needs to meet; it > will be very easy for it to become unproductive otherwise. > > I don't think that the characterisation that Ian has been reluctant to > take feedback is merited; I've seen him incorporate feedback from > several communities. Of course, he's operating with a fairly strict > set of criteria for changes to WS; YMMV. > > Cheers, > > > > On 26/10/2009, at 9:10 AM, Greg Wilkins wrote: > >> Salvatore Loreto wrote: >> >>> In particular, the working group will liaison with the WebApps working >>> group of the W3C around the Websockets protocol; if agreed by both >>> parties, >>> the HyBi working group may take over the development of the Websockets >>> protocol. >> >> Could we detune this from support of the specific Websocket protocol? >> How about: >> >> In particular, the working group will liaison with the WebApps working >> group of the W3C around a protocol to support the Websockets API; if >> agreed >> by both parties, the HyBi working group may take on prime >> responsibility >> for the specification of the protocol. >> >> >> >> regards >> >> _______________________________________________ >> hybi mailing list >> hybi@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi > > > -- > Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ > > _______________________________________________ > hybi mailing list > hybi@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi >
- [hybi] updated Charter proposal Salvatore Loreto
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal Jamie Lokier
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal Salvatore Loreto
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal Salvatore Loreto
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal Jamie Lokier
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (NATs and Fir… Salvatore Loreto
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal Greg Wilkins
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal Ian Hickson
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (WebSocket) Salvatore Loreto
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (WebSocket) Maciej Stachowiak
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (WebSocket) Greg Wilkins
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (WebSocket) Julian Reschke
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (WebSocket) Lisa Dusseault
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (WebSocket) Greg Wilkins
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (WebSocket) Ian Hickson
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (WebSocket) Maciej Stachowiak
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (WebSocket) Ian Hickson
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal Mark Nottingham
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (WebSocket) Mark Nottingham
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (WebSocket) Ian Hickson
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (WebSocket) Mark Nottingham
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (WebSocket) Greg Wilkins
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (WebSocket) Greg Wilkins
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (Criteria) (w… Salvatore Loreto
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (WebSocket) Julian Reschke
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (WebSocket) Anne van Kesteren
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (WebSocket) Julian Reschke
- Re: [hybi] updated Charter proposal (WebSocket) Greg Wilkins