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

Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> Sun, 24 July 2011 12:16 UTC

Return-Path: <w@1wt.eu>
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 EC87C21F850E; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 05:16:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.906
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.906 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-3.163, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_IS_SMALL6=0.556, 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 440A3kq8zflg; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 05:16:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 1wt.eu (1wt.eu [62.212.114.60]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3060F21F8509; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 05:16:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from willy@localhost) by mail.home.local (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p6OCGMb8026350; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 14:16:22 +0200
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 14:16:22 +0200
From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
Message-ID: <20110724121622.GS22405@1wt.eu>
References: <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> <B2C17B21-EA8A-4698-8C41-F55A9AA140D4@gbiv.com> <CALiegfkshhJVUHzTD1Kka5+RjGwZ5CS2J=Qk92jfSBg6Z0VfOQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CALiegfkshhJVUHzTD1Kka5+RjGwZ5CS2J=Qk92jfSBg6Z0VfOQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Cc: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi@ietf.org>, IETF-Discussion <ietf@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 12:16:30 -0000

On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 01:42:26PM +0200, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> 2011/7/23 Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>:
> >> Right. If WS borns with no SRV (as a MUST for WS clients) then just
> >> forget it and let inherit all the ugly limitations from HTTP protocol.
> >
> > I am tired of this.  SRV is not used for HTTP because SRV adds latency
> > to the initial request for no useful purpose whatsoever.
> 
> And I'm really tired of hearing the argument of the "latency" which
> nobody demostrates (but just talks about it without replying me how
> the same is not a problem in realtime protocols like SIP and XMPP).

Because you have never worked in a mobile phone environment. You'd be
amazed to see what end users are paying for ! Count 300-500 ms on average
for a DNS request.

> > In contrast, HTTP is deployed in an anarchic
> > manner in which there are often several HTTP servers per machine
> > (e.g., tests, staging, production, CUPS, etc,).
> 
> Could you explain me why DNS A is good but DNS SRV is bad in such
> "anarchic" deployments?

DNS is not mandatory for HTTP. It's not "DNS A" which makes it good, but
"no mandatory DNS". This is a huge difference.

Regards,
Willy