IETF Logo Mail Archive

[hybi] Subprotocols, extensions, LC, 17

Greg Longtin <gregl.msp@gmail.com> Wed, 05 October 2011 12:45 UTC

Return-Path: <gregl.msp@gmail.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 DAFFD21F8CC6 for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Oct 2011 05:45:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 MZ4lU6WMzG3z for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Oct 2011 05:45:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yw0-f44.google.com (mail-yw0-f44.google.com [209.85.213.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1E1621F8D2C for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Oct 2011 05:45:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ywm3 with SMTP id 3so1857138ywm.31 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 05 Oct 2011 05:49:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer:thread-index :content-language; bh=72vqUnBpXcbsJVosr96ZAzP+HXK5iUzDu0q3rbVGtXU=; b=l9B4mJ1wHeV7QLZnnzlUTnH6Cy4g1BOJQKJfNuFYKH2sOuqciYOsXaNF7efUqP73qO lwc9YGvEVu8rSHoPdtwBbOFVmwk4n684JY74ZUca3PVOFHp9cEI+gnF/gM7yVpjd337G j6Ohhd2oNWqVpqMdMQyhMct6tCaFT/EYxuZKg=
Received: by 10.101.178.20 with SMTP id f20mr2007639anp.154.1317818941908; Wed, 05 Oct 2011 05:49:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from GJL8710w (184-97-191-56.mpls.qwest.net. [184.97.191.56]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u13sm4531411anf.14.2011.10.05.05.49.00 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 05 Oct 2011 05:49:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: Greg Longtin <gregl.msp@gmail.com>
To: hybi <hybi@ietf.org>
References: <92457F4F764A5C4785FCDBDDDD76477A123C6E12@dfweml506-mbx> <CAH_y2NG+1TcQP6TVNbuwt6bjtCpQLaXtZvRjzBTefCrhb22+vA@mail.gmail.com> <92457F4F764A5C4785FCDBDDDD76477A123C6EA7@dfweml506-mbx> <CABLsOLCiBg3qD0TS9fYwpiw_WeXW3FYKjVcn-SA-biHTUdwgiA@mail.gmail.com> <92457F4F764A5C4785FCDBDDDD76477A123C7F00@dfweml506-mbx> <CABLsOLCfPW3HZF0q6=-sC0FGkJcqkdh4yj_4dvPH-ggbwUeM=A@mail.gmail.com> <92457F4F764A5C4785FCDBDDDD76477A123C8F43@dfweml506-mbx> <CAF4kx8dRf3dZDLhzg=uTDDa3d1QDoE=UcgZ=e_7amtPYcB_XPg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAF4kx8dRf3dZDLhzg=uTDDa3d1QDoE=UcgZ=e_7amtPYcB_XPg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2011 07:48:59 -0500
Message-ID: <4e8c523d.0dc5640a.57e0.591d@mx.google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AcyDJLoH2ZvWSYTtR0qmWIRnG3GxmgANKLPw
Content-Language: en-us
Subject: [hybi] Subprotocols, extensions, LC, 17
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: Wed, 05 Oct 2011 12:45:58 -0000

To all,

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 1:05 AM, Ian Fette <ifette@google.com> wrote:

At the end of the day, the way I think of it is that extensions are for protocol level things that the client and server software must support. subprotocols are contracts between the application software running in the client and server, but the client and server are blissfully unaware of any of these semantics. It would be hell if you had to recompile Apache to understand the semantics of each website you wanted to serve.


Having followed the progress of WS, my understanding of the distinction between subprotocols and extensions was as Ian has stated very well.

Conversely, the discussions about MBWS may show that the spec is not clear enough on the distinction.

When 17 was released, I tried to read the spec from the perspective of someone 'new' to WS, and felt there could a better description of the distinction.  This issue is also affected by the wording in the W3C 'The WebSocket API' document, which mentions both subprotocols and extensions.  To add to it, I speak English natively.

Not being familiar with changing/amending a 'Proposed Standard', I'm not sure if this can be addressed...

Thanks,

Greg Longtin

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email