Re: [hybi] I-D Action:draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-01.txt

[Olli Pettay <[e-mail]>]

On 09/02/2010 07:53 PM, Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 7:18 AM, Olli Pettay <[e-mail]
> <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>
>     On 09/02/2010 02:37 AM, Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) wrote:
>
>         +1. Adam, I share your concerns about versions on the web, but the
>         reality is there is no other way right now. Suggestions welcome
>         as to
>         alternatives.
>
>
>     Couldn't web applications use different subprotocols for different
>     versions of the web socket protocol.
>     That wouldn't be the nicest solution, but could work
>     well enough while we're trying to get some stable protocol.
>
>
>     -Olli
>
>
>     (I haven't read properly the current draft, but the framing looks too
>       complicated. I'll send comments once I've reviewed the draft
>     properly.)
>
>
>
>
> Subprotocols are intended to be an application level indication, and IMO
> should affect base framing. This seems to be conflating issues.

I understand what subprotocols are meant for, but while we're trying to
stabilize the protocol, subprotocols could be used for versioning too.


>
> Also, in addition to reviewing the draft, I would ask that you try to
> review the comments that led up the draft being what it is, otherwise we
> are likely to just revisit old discussions.

Yeah, I know that there is a risk that I will complain about things what
others have complained too, and what others like about.
In general it is not clear to me why we have to change framing so much.
The old hixie-style framing allow all sorts for extensions. There are
plenty of bits left for different kinds of frame types.

(And for things like multiplexing shared workers some
  people have just said that it doesn't work without even trying.)


-Olli


>
>
>
>
>         On Sep 1, 2010 4:27 PM, "John Tamplin" <[e-mail]
>         <mailto:[e-mail]>
>         <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>> wrote:
>          > On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Greg Wilkins
>         <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>         <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>> wrote:
>          >> my proposal was not to add versioning to the protocol - as I
>         know some
>          >> think it is an anti pattern.
>          >>
>          >> I just want to be able to implement the next draft without
>         breaking
>          >> all my users that have been working on the last draft.   So my
>          >> proposal is only for a draft version to be added by
>         implementers as
>          >> non-standard convenience at this time. The lack of a draft
>         version can
>          >> be taken to mean the final stable version.
>          >>
>          >> How else do you expect servers to track the drafts and deal
>         with the
>          >> various browser implementations out there?
>          >
>          > The problem is that the framing of v75, v76, v00, and v01 are
>          > incompatible. If you want to write a server that
>         interoperates with
>          > browsers implementing these drafts (I know at least v75 and
>         v76 are in
>          > the wild), then you have to rely on heuristics to figure out
>         which one
>          > you are talking to. Even if there isn't a version in the 1.0
>         spec,
>          > any attempt to get real-world data while the spec is changing
>         means
>          > you either have a version number or you heuristically
>         determine one --
>          > the latter is obviously more prone to error.
>          >
>          > I would suggest adding Sec-WebSocket-Draft: 01 to
>         implementations of
>          > this draft, and that header will only be present before the
>         spec is
>          > finalized.
>          >
>          > --
>          > John A. Tamplin
>          > Software Engineer (GWT), Google
>          > _______________________________________________
>          > hybi mailing list
>          > [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail]
>         <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>
>          > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi
>
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         hybi mailing list
>         [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>         https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi
>
>
>