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

Tobias Oberstein <tobias.oberstein@tavendo.de> Tue, 04 June 2013 05:29 UTC

Return-Path: <tobias.oberstein@tavendo.de>
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 1714111E8104 for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Jun 2013 22:29:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.449
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 ll23TRga7dGn for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Jun 2013 22:29:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EXHUB020-5.exch020.serverdata.net (exhub020-5.exch020.serverdata.net [206.225.164.32]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14B9121E8056 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Jun 2013 21:41:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EXVMBX020-12.exch020.serverdata.net ([169.254.3.90]) by EXHUB020-5.exch020.serverdata.net ([206.225.164.32]) with mapi; Mon, 3 Jun 2013 21:41:12 -0700
From: Tobias Oberstein <tobias.oberstein@tavendo.de>
To: Roberto Peon <fenix@google.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 21:41:08 -0700
Thread-Topic: [hybi] Call for interest: multiplexing dedicated for WebSocket
Thread-Index: Ac5gps9A4RTK9OsfRVSmJA9gpDTNtAANCJ7Q
Message-ID: <634914A010D0B943A035D226786325D4422DC213B1@EXVMBX020-12.exch020.serverdata.net>
References: <CAH9hSJZxr+aG7GZa4f-dUOTGj4bnJ+3XxivUX4jei5CMyqN4LQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAH9hSJZUG1f+3Uk=t2=A5i4O9=wPvAisspM=pgmGEH9emTL9-Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAH9hSJZai_UuxW4O6mZcEJT2DJoURtLo16XNci1qkYVWv4HVdg@mail.gmail.com> <007501ce56f0$67f74080$37e5c180$@noemax.com> <519CD6A1.7080708@ericsson.com> <519CE075.4000106@tavendo.de> <CAM5k6X9WmO80hiQZ6_GqK66PAd3of=2ZRi9=VrWj52apA1+=5g@mail.gmail.com> <CAFWmRJ2Hbe0x5FeV2T7Gkp3WEsxQHe2=YPBTgvHYLcus3A4rBQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAH9hSJYOPvsFPDXLOa29ASd8xavLdvfRK_cVd=Uc=Vaydz1O=w@mail.gmail.com> <CAFWmRJ2M0Gtoz80+6v+=0Ldm9+xE2brqD2shVcBPuNz+QGiKHg@mail.gmail.com> <634914A010D0B943A035D226786325D4422DC20DAA@EXVMBX020-12.exch020.serverdata.net> <CAGzyod7o8AR2WxNrkZ-WWb5nc3zAJMvWhpfNVaW26sregESyjQ@mail.gmail.com> <634914A010D0B943A035D226786325D4422DC2133A@EXVMBX020-12.exch020.serverdata.net> <CAGzyod4a9isKL1M9EGtH73NDkxVsOO8JnrzzWCnV2CC-U1aGkg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGzyod4a9isKL1M9EGtH73NDkxVsOO8JnrzzWCnV2CC-U1aGkg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US
Content-Language: de-DE
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: de-DE, en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: Simone Bordet <sbordet@intalio.com>, "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: Tue, 04 Jun 2013 05:29:43 -0000

> Noone is unbiased, but I'm a lot less biased than you'd think given my name is within the WS doc too and I was pretty active in attempting (and sadly failing) to get mux into the base WS functionality. :)

I think the extensibility built into WS (extensions and subprotocols) is a strength, and having a relatively simple base functionality is good. I don't want to implement MUX on an embedded device like Arduino, and I likely don't need it there anyway. Also: having implemented an automated WS protocol test suite I can say that getting good coverage of the "relatively simple base functionality" already requires a lot. Even the >300 test cases we have today don't cover 100%. I guess writing automated tests for WS-MUX / flow-control / scheduling might be a challenge;)

>Out of curiosity, and on a different topic, how large have the messages been in your applications?

I haven't don't systematic measurements / stats, but - today - probably between 20 - 20k of JSON payload with a fair amount of URIs sprinkled in.

Now that we've implemented "permessage-deflate", I'll take the chance and add some traffic stats tracking ..

/Tobias