Re: [hybi] The Web Application Messaging Protocol => Draft RFC

Tobias Oberstein <tobias.oberstein@tavendo.de> Sun, 27 September 2015 15:41 UTC

Return-Path: <tobias.oberstein@tavendo.de>
X-Original-To: hybi@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A68671B2ADC for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 27 Sep 2015 08:41:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FGfaZpk3aMWf for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 27 Sep 2015 08:41:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EXHUB020-4.exch020.serverdata.net (exhub020-4.exch020.serverdata.net [206.225.164.31]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF9A51B2ADB for <hybi@ietf.org>; Sun, 27 Sep 2015 08:41:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.140] (88.217.49.51) by smtpx20.serverdata.net (206.225.164.36) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.377.0; Sun, 27 Sep 2015 08:41:17 -0700
To: "hybi@ietf.org" <hybi@ietf.org>
References: <55FAD8C4.5080706@tavendo.de>
From: Tobias Oberstein <tobias.oberstein@tavendo.de>
Message-ID: <56080E1B.4000107@tavendo.de>
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2015 17:41:15 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <55FAD8C4.5080706@tavendo.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hybi/knMDoiyP_6D0jgUVXBWxUMzYM1o>
Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Alexander_G=c3=b6dde?= <alexander.goedde@tavendo.de>, barryleiba@computer.org
Subject: Re: [hybi] The Web Application Messaging Protocol => Draft RFC
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Sun, 27 Sep 2015 15:41:20 -0000

We've rewritten the WAMP spec (basic profile) into a RFC draft:

https://github.com/tavendo/WAMP/blob/master/rfc/draft-oberstet-hybi-tavendo-wamp-01.txt

This is the first RFC style document we've written (well, Alex did the 
rewriting;). We've tried hard to follow all formal rules and started to 
reword the text so it better fits "RFC style".

The the draft likely has more formal issues, but we now have a concrete 
proposal text to discuss and work from on the content matter.

Currently the draft is on GitHub, but I guess there is a process to get 
each of the draft versions published.

How does the process of publishing RFC draft work?

Anything else to do?

/Tobias


Am 17.09.2015 um 17:14 schrieb Tobias Oberstein:
> Hi,
>
> the "Web Application Messaging Protocol" (WAMP) is a _WebSocket
> subprotocol_ that provides two application messaging patterns in one
> unified protocol:
>
> - Remote Procedure Calls
> - Publish & Subscribe
>
> There is an open specification, multiple independent implementations and
> a growing user community. The protocol has seen takeup in particular
> with IoT applications.
>
> Project site:	http://wamp.ws/
> Specification:	https://github.com/tavendo/WAMP/tree/master/spec
> Mailing list:	https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/wampws
> Chat room:	https://gitter.im/tavendo/WAMP
>
> While we do have a spec, having a proper RFC for WAMP would be a further
> step forward.
>
> Working on a RFC and producing a high-quality document is a lot of work
> and requires significant commitment by multiple parties, since
> otherwise, sufficient peer review and feedback isn't guaranteed.
>
> While a lot of contributors have been working over the last +3 years on
> WAMP, we need commitment to work on the _actual RFC_.
>
> So if you do have interest in seeing a WAMP RFC, your input and feedback
> is welcome! Please reply ..
>
> Cheers,
> /Tobias
>
> _______________________________________________
> hybi mailing list
> hybi@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi
>