Re: [hybi] Reliable message delivery (was Re: Technical feedback.)

Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> Wed, 03 February 2010 15:58 UTC

Return-Path: <mjs@apple.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 4239028C137 for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Feb 2010 07:58:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.445
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.445 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.154, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 Wk0vEfP3bQKt for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Feb 2010 07:58:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-out4.apple.com (mail-out4.apple.com [17.254.13.23]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71E2928B797 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Feb 2010 07:58:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relay16.apple.com (relay16.apple.com [17.128.113.55]) by mail-out4.apple.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58D3489EFC55 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Feb 2010 07:59:06 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: 11807137-b7bd4ae000000f0d-7b-4b699d4a5084
Received: from et.apple.com (et.apple.com [17.151.62.12]) by relay16.apple.com (Apple SCV relay) with SMTP id 27.40.03853.A4D996B4; Wed, 3 Feb 2010 07:59:06 -0800 (PST)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Received: from [17.151.86.222] by et.apple.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-7.04 (built Sep 26 2008; 32bit)) with ESMTPSA id <0KX900AA4WEHE340@et.apple.com> for hybi@ietf.org; Wed, 03 Feb 2010 07:59:06 -0800 (PST)
From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
In-reply-to: <5821ea241002030751l1e8b414atd450a69179337c56@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 07:59:04 -0800
Message-id: <06912AB8-D55D-46F4-AAEC-0A2146FB3BB8@apple.com>
References: <4B62C5FE.8090904@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <4B672C9D.9010205@ericsson.com> <op.u7gy9bag64w2qv@annevk-t60> <96935605-E8B8-4718-B60F-570FD2C199E4@apple.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1002012354380.3846@ps20323.dreamhostps.com> <F21A8D9A-1E27-48C8-8818-0BB6872A2CE4@apple.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1002020056460.21600@ps20323.dreamhostps.com> <4B694A1E.3050300@ninebynine.org> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1002031020560.26790@ps20323.dreamhostps.com> <4B6983CC.9050203@webtide.com> <5821ea241002030751l1e8b414atd450a69179337c56@mail.gmail.com>
To: Pieter Hintjens <ph@imatix.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077)
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAZE=
Cc: "hybi@ietf.org" <hybi@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [hybi] Reliable message delivery (was Re: Technical feedback.)
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: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 15:58:24 -0000

On Feb 3, 2010, at 7:51 AM, Pieter Hintjens wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 3:10 PM, Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com> wrote:
> 
>> I don't think you can assume that most websocket using software
>> and/or subprotocols will have the same developer working on
>> the client side and the server side.
> 
> I've never seen a protocol that makes this assumption and it is a
> quite extraordinary one from the perspective of interoperabilty.
> 
> Ian, could you elaborate please?  I do not understand your intention
> in making this statement, nor how significant it is to implementing
> WebSocket.

The likely deployments of WebSocket are going to be one of these:

JavaScript code running in a browser --> browser's WebSocket implementation ====> WebSocket service that directly implements the protocol

JavaScript code running in a browser --> browser's WebSocket implementation ====> generic WebSocket server --> service code


Ian is saying that he thinks the JS code running in the browser and the specific WebSocket service are likely to be created by the same entity on some level, and he apparently thinks it is likely that many WebSocket services will implement the protocol directly rather than use any kind of framework or standard server. Note though that the browser code that implements the client side of the WebSocket protocol will almost never be written by the same party. Also, if the WebSocket service accepts cross-site connections, the assumption will not be true at all.

Regards,
Maciej