Re: [hybi] Extensibility mechanisms?

[Greg Wilkins <[e-mail]>]

Martin J. Dürst wrote:
> On 2010/04/18 11:55, Ian Hickson wrote:
>> On Sat, 17 Apr 2010, Greg Wilkins wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm sorry but despite your original aims, enabling amateur programmers
>>> to write protocols that avoid the need for vendor supplied
>>> infrastructure is not the prime reason this WG has come into existence.
>>
>> If that isn't a goal for this working group, then that's fine, but it
>> means I'm in the wrong group.
> 
> If what Greg wrote means that "you won't be able to deploy web sockets
> unless you pay one of these vendors a lot of money", then I clearly
> would disagree. But I sincerely hope that's not what Greg meant.

That is most definitely not what I meant.

As an open source developer, I've spent 15 years writing a
server that I give away for free.

What I meant is that I believe that the IETF is largely
compromised of individuals working for vendors who
have an interest in creating interoperable infrastructure.


The reason that we wish to create infrastructure, is not
part of some evil scheme to prevent application developers
from accessing the raw internet, and thus make millions
from selling our infrastructure products and services.
Rather it is because that we genuinely believe that
the best computer science solution to enable the
safe and efficient use of the network is to provide
some appropriate layer of infrastructure.


I don't oppose Ian's view of enabling application developers
to just crack open a socket and implement websockets because
I want to increase market share of Jetty.
I oppose it because it is a bad idea and will just result
in many insecure and bug ridden applications - not matter
how simple or trivial the protocol is.

regards