IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] Last Call: <draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-10.txt> (The WebSocket protocol) to Proposed Standard

Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com> Sun, 24 July 2011 18:46 UTC

Return-Path: <pmcmanus@mozilla.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 B808B21F89C1 for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 11:46:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.399
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
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 msil9AWZekAe for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 11:46:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from linode.ducksong.com (linode.ducksong.com [64.22.125.164]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54ED521F889A for <hybi@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 11:46:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by linode.ducksong.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 9C10310193; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 14:46:56 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [192.168.16.226] (cpe-67-253-92-25.maine.res.rr.com [67.253.92.25]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by linode.ducksong.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D487110178; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 14:46:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>
To: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
In-Reply-To: <CALiegfnH3nEQs18bfJQ2Ptuh7dqcH52g6g6bnOHk5wHM_Yo1yA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110711140229.17432.23519.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CALiegfk0zVVRBbOP4ugsVXKmcLnryujP6DZqF6Bu_dC2C3PpeQ@mail.gmail.com> <9031.1311082001.631622@puncture> <CALiegfk_GLAhAf=yEe6hYw2bwtxEwg9aJN+f0Bm9he5QgsRavA@mail.gmail.com> <CAP992=Ft6NwG+rbcuWUP0npwVNHY_znHmXmznBQO_krMo3RT6g@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegfmTWMP3GhS1-k2aoHHXkUkB+eWqV=2+BufuWVR1s2Z-EA@mail.gmail.com> <20110721163910.GA16854@1wt.eu> <CAP992=FrX5VxP2o0JLNoJs8nXXba7wbZ6RN9wBUYC0ZSN_wbAg@mail.gmail.com> <9031.1311270000.588511@puncture> <CALiegf=pYzybvc7WB2QfPg6FKrhLxgzHuP-DpuuMfZYJV6Z7FQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAP992=FJymFPKcPVWrF-LkcEtNUz=Kt9L_ex+kLtjiGjL1T46w@mail.gmail.com> <4E28A51F.4020704@callenish.com> <9031.1311286867.939466@puncture> <4E28BA9D.6010501@callenish.com> <CAP992=GedTEfimykCWwdwm=BsZdwFRJO36EO0a_o7iejURJ+tQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALiegfnwNyYDy=SyrqHJXV0ZreADb7F8QySvgdHofW9Hm9miZQ@mail.gmail.com> <1311518046.1862.235.camel@ds9> <CALiegfnH3nEQs18bfJQ2Ptuh7dqcH52g6g6bnOHk5wHM_Yo1yA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 14:46:47 -0400
Message-ID: <1311533207.1862.240.camel@ds9>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.2
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [hybi] Last Call: <draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-10.txt> (The WebSocket protocol) to Proposed Standard
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, 24 Jul 2011 18:46:57 -0000

On Sun, 2011-07-24 at 20:33 +0200, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> 2011/7/24 Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>:
> >> ~100 ms (if the DNS server is not local and there is no DNS cache for
> >> the given domain). And just during the WS connection, no more. Taking
> >> into account that a WS will be *usually* connected after loading a web
> >> page, such ~100ms in a non-full-realtime protocol is insignificant.
> >>
> >
> > reducing startup latencies is a priority for me. I would not implement
> > such a scheme.
> 
> Well, will you implement WebSocket (I assume in Mozilla web browsers)?
> or just in case it fulfills all your own requeriments?
> 

we don't implement protocols just because someone wrote them down.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email