IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] A WebSocket handshake

Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> Fri, 08 October 2010 21:40 UTC

Return-Path: <mjs@apple.com>
X-Original-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5DDA3A6953 for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Oct 2010 14:40:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.606
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.606 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.008, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QCK8yyHUNh1o for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Oct 2010 14:40:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-out3.apple.com (mail-out3.apple.com [17.254.13.22]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BD053A693C for <hybi@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Oct 2010 14:40:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay13.apple.com (relay13.apple.com [17.128.113.29]) by mail-out3.apple.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07573AE13CAC for <hybi@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Oct 2010 14:41:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: 1180711d-b7c86ae000000247-be-4caf9013f997
Received: from gertie.apple.com (gertie.apple.com [17.151.62.15]) by relay13.apple.com (Apple SCV relay) with SMTP id 94.16.00583.3109FAC4; Fri, 8 Oct 2010 14:41:39 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_qVHCDM68QF0uWFL0uAtP+w)"
Received: from [17.151.102.89] by gertie.apple.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-7.04 (built Sep 26 2008; 32bit)) with ESMTPSA id <0L9Z00DEYQXF9R40@gertie.apple.com> for hybi@ietf.org; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 14:41:39 -0700 (PDT)
From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
In-reply-to: <AANLkTimfXPuh=8z-Q75iLFApvi93Wq+kC4LY9ev=bGFu@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2010 14:41:39 -0700
Message-id: <FACFC0FA-4ED4-4B18-BBCB-6D48D84D0D06@apple.com>
References: <AANLkTimQ5x-v+Mz_OHrNDdtVd94E+HOBWwo3_f1ktEeg@mail.gmail.com> <AB43D171-AC38-47CE-BDC7-401E6D782622@apple.com> <AANLkTimfXPuh=8z-Q75iLFApvi93Wq+kC4LY9ev=bGFu@mail.gmail.com>
To: Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081)
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
Cc: Hybi <hybi@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [hybi] A WebSocket handshake
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Fri, 08 Oct 2010 21:40:38 -0000

On Oct 8, 2010, at 2:28 PM, Adam Barth wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 2:10 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
> 
>> I like the general approach (based on CONNECT and encrypting the data stream), it seems more robust than depending on the details of error handling code.
> 
> Thanks.  I think we can use the encrypted additional information sent
> with the initial handshake to address the concerns you express above.

It would be good to spell out the details of what additional information is sent and how. Then we could evaluate how much of a burden it would be for multiplexing servers to dispatch between HTTP and WebSocket, to dispatch to the right virtual host for WebSocket connections, and to dispatch among the "servlets" (or equivalent) that implement individual WebSocket resources.

It seems like they would have to handle this differently than how it's currently done for HTTP, it would be useful to understand how different.

Regards,
Maciej

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email