[hybi] Call for interest: multiplexing dedicated for WebSocket

Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com> Wed, 15 May 2013 11:45 UTC

Return-Path: <tyoshino@google.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 C42CA21F8FA5 for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 May 2013 04:45:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 5muhpFoOUa5q for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 May 2013 04:45:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ea0-x235.google.com (mail-ea0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4013:c01::235]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D2F621F8F4A for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 May 2013 04:45:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ea0-f181.google.com with SMTP id a11so1007260eae.40 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 May 2013 04:45:49 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=6AIFy3bVs9k8oVot0Xu3PV5lSd7+nZw6zvLCFwC5wIE=; b=gNQ1/lRaQz9mlreuxndVcnnzCqMeCM8HDzRM4SGj9XMGgeHKvgbwa4wK016vXg8AQo aFfCqjOA0KM5SRPisEaonf6910gB38Jemwyo8LyrdDOPNaRIXphAJFNzfGfMDja1kCKp LVdMlOPzaUIWcsghDsS01gbF0ZkZ4UKd+U38UfV4MtDKIvK2LfizUNebL5xv/H/rv5iE YLNjNZ1HBOCuX0Zjf/89sjCQXiG0VpdB8f4qeN7VyJ0CUdDB/wu46MI/Lb0zEZnFVCZm BjXNFw8LHrmZbqd+YkKaEt2HCVCs1LG64BUcU6ps+dyPxQgSyBc9qYcRikD0QvJQf0e/ b3tQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=6AIFy3bVs9k8oVot0Xu3PV5lSd7+nZw6zvLCFwC5wIE=; b=CEuvDWmAS+iUIhSEHMTLONF7FUstXv2hJxQ5CmZKAYtNTxQ8CFJho/5iZP55a8hnk1 jyJljAJ51GE0qAULfCOYtBqI7OaqyhgAcE+tbMC/4NWTxLWEmunlblV+ujgGBkUcFqR1 jBjkdTYqsQ7SCwbtq7Ei+XjAs8LIe6xjLxfRAXW9UmPobvg44r3dtUEoGDNW8Bu40Vdf 5qN3OsqcNBkJJTbIkNpQfANVeD4ycsRZCTCPz0KirAtRZkPEkRciFmYoJlaWdZkD/ofq XTocDeFtYc/BAPfEFjiZb/xqpbOso5zWTeWVGR0B2E29LgUiMpAV5vNrkyTVwJaV8O+P X2Iw==
X-Received: by 10.14.7.198 with SMTP id 46mr39308718eep.17.1368618349658; Wed, 15 May 2013 04:45:49 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.85.152 with HTTP; Wed, 15 May 2013 04:45:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 20:45:28 +0900
Message-ID: <CAH9hSJZxr+aG7GZa4f-dUOTGj4bnJ+3XxivUX4jei5CMyqN4LQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "hybi@ietf.org" <hybi@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c1b76490b94604dcc04a24
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnox237D0h35gzb4MBOhDYzTZ3QfzRznhcZGPkmWWRCsLzbQ11exmIzh2Lr9czFIXX7jBQs0axsTSKbdPTJe4lQgPoUgQ3RnFzjqz2fE1urxSFcWg0N2Gx1abtdWLdsko72eRNsv2e7syXBTqV8tJkwfjmg8oSHtTQj1mOdIDllBnFsdlatJGV2UE9aQjn0SMx/7yk4
Subject: [hybi] Call for interest: multiplexing dedicated for WebSocket
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, 15 May 2013 11:45:51 -0000

Hi all,

(Note: This is not WG's official process)

I'd like to survey how many people are interested in standardization and
implementation of multiplexing dedicated for WebSocket again at this point.

* Multiplexing is still important for WebSocket

HyBi WG has been working on the WebSocket multiplexing spec (
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-hybi-websocket-multiplexing-10).
Multiplexing functionality is really important to make WebSocket scalable
enough to be used for large scale production services. It's still true.

* Rapid adoption of HTTP/2.0

While our work is delayed and delayed again, httpbis folks started
seriously working on next generation HTTP. Now it's actively standardized
as HTTP/2.0 based on Google's SPDY experiments and input from httpbis
members. Gradually but several web service providers already started
adopting HTTP/2.0.

* WebSocket/SPDY experiment

Chrome WebSocket team has been working on both WebSocket/SPDY and dedicated
multiplexing in parallel. You can find the WebSocket/SPDY proposal
incorporated into Roberto's unofficial draft (section 4) at
https://github.com/grmocg/SPDY-Specification/blob/gh-pages/draft-mbelshe-spdy-00.txt.
Its framing is not so efficient as the dedicated one, but can coexist with
HTTP traffic in one TCP connection and developers just need to understand
and implement HTTP/2.0 framing.

* Concentrate on the best one

Developing and maintaining two different multiplexing code will be burden
for vendors. It seems that we should stop and think which approach we
should focus on.

Thanks