Re: [hybi] Call for interest: multiplexing dedicated for WebSocket

[Salvatore Loreto <[e-mail]>]

<as individual>
I tend to agree with the fact that if we want standardize mux in 
WebSocket we should speed up simplifying the spec.

/Salvatore

On 5/22/13 4:29 PM, Arman Djusupov wrote:
>
> Sorry, just realized that my message was sent to Takeshi privately by 
> mistake a few days ago.. (wrong button). It was actually intended for 
> the list so I am repeating it publicly now:
>
> Obviously continuing to develop a hybi-mux spec for another year or 
> two doesn't make sense. Taking into account that new specifications 
> are coming and that HTTP2.0 will probably provide multiplexing for 
> both WebSocket and HTTP traffic, at  this stage it would only be worth 
> investing development time in a "simple and ready to go" hybi-mux 
> specification. Maybe if we simplify the spec to rock bottom 
> simplicity, even sacrificing some features so that we can conclude it 
> very fast, then maybe vendors might pick it up. This way we will give 
> to WebSocket its own mux for now, while the HTTPbis draft might take 
> much longer to form into the final specification. In any case, 
> hybi-mux must be reviewed and finalized in a very short time, plus it 
> should be simpler and easier to implement than both SDPY and HTTPbis 
> based multiplexing.
>
> With best regards,
>
> Arman
>
> *From:*[e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] *On Behalf 
> Of *Takeshi Yoshino
> *Sent:* Sunday, May 19, 2013 7:31 AM
> *To:* [e-mail]
> *Subject:* Re: [hybi] Call for interest: multiplexing dedicated for 
> WebSocket
>
> I got one comment about this.
>
> He/she suggested that we finish the WebSocket dedicated multiplexing 
> quickly even by simplifying the spec much e.g. cutting some 
> functionality in it that would take much time to get consensus, and 
> when HTTP/2.0 is matured, switch to that.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> hybi mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi