IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] Extensibility mechanisms?

"Thomson, Martin" <Martin.Thomson@andrew.com> Fri, 16 April 2010 07:00 UTC

Return-Path: <Martin.Thomson@andrew.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 AE7753A685E for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 00:00:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.835
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.835 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.764, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 4zSCC9+vnPDX for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 00:00:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from csmailgw1.commscope.com (csmailgw1.commscope.com [198.135.207.244]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDD723A6810 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 00:00:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.86.20.103] ([10.86.20.103]:38761 "EHLO ACDCE7HC2.commscope.com") by csmailgw1.commscope.com with ESMTP id S17796863Ab0DPHAj (ORCPT <rfc822; hybi@ietf.org>); Fri, 16 Apr 2010 02:00:39 -0500
Received: from SISPE7HC2.commscope.com (10.97.4.13) by ACDCE7HC2.commscope.com (10.86.20.103) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.393.1; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 02:00:39 -0500
Received: from SISPE7MB1.commscope.com ([fe80::9d82:a492:85e3:a293]) by SISPE7HC2.commscope.com ([fe80::58c3:2447:f977:57c3%10]) with mapi; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 15:00:35 +0800
From: "Thomson, Martin" <Martin.Thomson@andrew.com>
To: Justin Erenkrantz <justin@erenkrantz.com>, Hybi <hybi@ietf.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 15:02:01 +0800
Thread-Topic: [hybi] Extensibility mechanisms?
Thread-Index: AcrdMHTJIOK1TgI3QB2AawBs5LJoiwAAY45A
Message-ID: <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03E3F313E5@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com>
References: <h2w5c902b9e1004152345j992b815bz5f8d38f06a19181a@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <h2w5c902b9e1004152345j992b815bz5f8d38f06a19181a@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BCN: Meridius 1000 Version 3.4 on csmailgw1.commscope.com
X-BCN-Sender: Martin.Thomson@andrew.com
Subject: Re: [hybi] Extensibility mechanisms?
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: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 07:00:47 -0000

The base protocol need only support feature negotiation for most of these.  It's only when the sub-protocol wants to modify the framing or do something fancy that you need anything more.

Since there are too many degrees of freedom, it might help if someone is willing to propose a strawman, so...I'm with Justin: let's see it.

(I think that Greg promised a BWTP over Web Sockets proposal, that might be good candidate.)

--Martin

> -----Original Message-----
> From: hybi-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:hybi-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Justin Erenkrantz
> Sent: Friday, 16 April 2010 4:46 PM
> To: Hybi
> Subject: [hybi] Extensibility mechanisms?
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I think we're starting to come to a consensus that there is some type
> of "base" protocol with some type of "sub-protocol" or "extensibility"
> mechanisms for Web Sockets.  (Please correct me if I'm wrong, but
> Hixie's latest post seems to indicate a shift towards accepting that
> type of model.)
> 
> During the IETF-77 session, I pointed out that we really haven't
> started any discussions around what those mechanisms would look like
> in practice.  Given how much we're apparently placing into
> "sub-protocols", I'd like to kick-off that discussion.
> 
> So...does anyone have any thoughts to get the ball rolling?  *grin*  --
> justin
> _______________________________________________
> hybi mailing list
> hybi@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email