IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] Ping/Pong body (was Re: TSV-Directorate review of draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-07)

Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com> Wed, 25 May 2011 03:11 UTC

Return-Path: <tyoshino@google.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 E3255E0751 for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 May 2011 20:11:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.976
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4xhdLF1aPgjx for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 May 2011 20:11:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (smtp-out.google.com [74.125.121.67]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5183E06E3 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 May 2011 20:11:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wpaz37.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz37.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.101]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id p4P3B8ve018408 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 May 2011 20:11:08 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1306293069; bh=8YYj5B0lTkVJ4fqU5P6TF5ul9js=; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=l9ZmrwTOC9B4mS0KFJmfLqm5KiwPpIo5ntVyu912nrYmFmgz3ftSI8Gxjpr2UBAjN m78DuNOGu+6DK/5wuG5sQ==
Received: from gxk23 (gxk23.prod.google.com [10.202.11.23]) by wpaz37.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id p4P3AohO009717 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 May 2011 20:11:07 -0700
Received: by gxk23 with SMTP id 23so3001919gxk.28 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 May 2011 20:11:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=jLEpa5tpEuuLjP8lbp8+wfy5hEzkLTmFJtn8v9SumxM=; b=R4wdbxEf1UbaeSRCC7Qg8uQAP3IHB8wXPb/xDrvZ/e0QD8mmooDIieKseNu10luiIZ lA+1ZI/4z5VSW5+s9HCQ==
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=google.com; s=beta; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; b=LMZ+LwhUT7T0m8DtAcmTH55ICa3TVucxNEh0MjxG7KhvAB9/W9SmZbX7T/aTE0ZAdP ZXb6rx5kGWR3gxLsFKnw==
Received: by 10.151.50.15 with SMTP id c15mr4881709ybk.285.1306293067090; Tue, 24 May 2011 20:11:07 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.150.50.13 with HTTP; Tue, 24 May 2011 20:10:47 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4DDC0B84.9070500@callenish.com>
References: <ED13A76FCE9E96498B049688227AEA292C6A81E4@TK5EX14MBXC206.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <4DD9686C.7020509@callenish.com> <BANLkTin2LcHgPH7s4-T_1LJa_UhkigJziw@mail.gmail.com> <4DDC0B84.9070500@callenish.com>
From: Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 12:10:47 +0900
Message-ID: <BANLkTinE0aPmy315qKaf8zjt1y0xFRjNsg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bruce Atherton <bruce@callenish.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0015175709063c8c3704a4110e17"
X-System-Of-Record: true
Cc: "hybi@ietf.org" <hybi@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [hybi] Ping/Pong body (was Re: TSV-Directorate review of draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-07)
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: Wed, 25 May 2011 03:11:11 -0000

On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 04:48, Bruce Atherton <bruce@callenish.com> wrote:

> I see. Thanks for the clarification. I take your point. It is perhaps
> because the body is so under-specified that this problem arises. You could
> get around it by, for example, requiring PING to always start with a
> timestamp and requiring an unsolicited PONG not to. Or you could require a
> UUID from both PING and unsolicited PONG.
>
> But any of those ideas is no better (and probably worse) than your
> solution, so I'm happy to support it.


Yeah. I'm fine if anything by which I can distinguish them is specified by
the spec.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email