Re: [hybi] New Chrome WebSocket implementation: testers wanted

Adam Rice <ricea@google.com> Thu, 17 April 2014 03:41 UTC

Return-Path: <ricea@google.com>
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 D306A1A0438 for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 20:41:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.849
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.849 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_55=0.6, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.272, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 iDHvSI4SjPTJ for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 20:41:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ob0-x22a.google.com (mail-ob0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22a]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 275161A0433 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 20:41:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ob0-f170.google.com with SMTP id uz6so13531038obc.29 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 20:41:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=jTk4UDYh5jebsgmQRZ4n896tQWIgQsUjcykLHmDcoTE=; b=KDUU+yugODsWEo+j/01dlhF9td4/iEHF0b0oID3cXwk3+7Q/fl49msE5EzxYfH6pTP RTZNlqGa9sB9PjUvZGsR66PxOdVlpf1A/2g7pDeqCNQ678ZK8514va429uGk4NuZhcsP QgcTgjrFJw6bWgBTI+vDvS7lJAq5F+wFa55cxm2LsmKhZOSer3MD3SxneX40GG+mO8+B crsnPziBxGDpcIRDSuJgJHVJNrMQHyQgT2fQpW+iP8eF3imUEiAhHn0KanUwB+sdmIOU 2RY3BLnFaukVmSTyhOC1F52+7jFwXyZcZHQljRVeNChhDcKArWdinfQ0FWYrfIOpcbrp DKcw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=jTk4UDYh5jebsgmQRZ4n896tQWIgQsUjcykLHmDcoTE=; b=jyM2kPTihLjHOB1ksTuWBNQ84g+bUe4cjtqsIJhdfmF+HoXaay69XLC4H8Mo31gVcX 3MVJ1jFnJF11/rIOdHnHwQJg9XDrYpI7DdPbwi2tn5Me+K+PtFFZlbtWybKi6+NVYlGG 2Ispm/Lf7hBKH4KHQ44e1di/lM7Y0lVZIFXq3sGJg5hC/M3fNEqU/0jjgaXCvIuvLsgp N63rKx3zj5lXTTNyhXvz6vYKn8UcfQKTc8X5c4P0sUTIuG9pAAHxGzMapb0jYVrtJnpb SrGiop+vifdZ0cJjGORknKY0FiE/jw4y85Ketzp9iWp7bVCqq5R3TeVKuXnW5pfwbf5k mvuA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmfriv9pJOIfXu23vWOgaKUIg47Seo//5kh6+A53PHAsXLUQC1OJAc32Qx1mmYoBTpHD4OAD/cqu5sKBbyykgAWNxp5TRbjskLqYsM02HMcLyHg4nehAKD+CyjjBOI0OgoPj2bZdZVCB4Row37gOFXcwaeS+mg4FN3o3BCUT+Znq6vtoHDdSRc1D6n1pRykaRrdG2Yy
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.153.226 with SMTP id vj2mr9926046obb.26.1397706090460; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 20:41:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.182.76.167 with HTTP; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 20:41:30 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAPwYjp=uVdPLS4dq4xeuRXFN5di6x=ydv=agPPdBO82pMd6pDA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPwYjp=uVdPLS4dq4xeuRXFN5di6x=ydv=agPPdBO82pMd6pDA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 12:41:30 +0900
Message-ID: <CAHixhFo3n_yc_kVqOoNOFqrDmrsAMDp4K7HVcztRuxu_4VBYqw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Adam Rice <ricea@google.com>
To: Dario Crivelli <dario.crivelli@lightstreamer.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013d0dc005d41404f734cff3
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hybi/pH9rf2J0FOOWSujywY1sQcAzeXU
Cc: "hybi@ietf.org" <hybi@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [hybi] New Chrome WebSocket implementation: testers wanted
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: <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: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 03:41:42 -0000

Dario,

Thank you for the feedback. I will check this scenario.

I assume you have already instructed the browser to accept the certificate?
Otherwise it should fail with either implementation.

Thanks,
Adam



On 16 April 2014 20:09, Dario Crivelli <dario.crivelli@lightstreamer.com>wrote;wrote:

> Hi Adam,
>
> We have tried the extended version of Chrome against our Lightstreamer
> Server and we have noticed that, with the new implementation enabled, the
> browser can't open a WebSocket towards Lightstreamer Server in the
> following conditions:
> - wss: is used
> - the server certificate is self-signed
> (on the other hand, when using either plain ws: or a valid certificate we
> found no issue).
>
> The failure seems to be related not with the WebSocket protocol itself,
> but with the failure to establish a SSL connection.
> However, the same does not happen with the new implementation disabled.
>
> In particular, we have noticed small differences in the way the browser
> opens the sockets for SSL.
> When the certificate is self-signed, the browser sometimes seems to need
> two attempts in order to establish a connection:
> in the first attempt, the handshake succeeds but, after that, the browser
> immediately closes the socket;
> then the second attempt succeeds fully.
> We see the above pattern also when the new implementation is not enabled,
> but when it is enabled we see more occurrences of the pattern and this
> seems correlated with the failure in WebSocket establishment.
>
> Dario Crivelli
>
>
>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 15:11:49 +0900
>> From: Adam Rice <ricea@google.com>
>> To: "hybi@ietf.org" <hybi@ietf.org>
>> Subject: [hybi] New Chrome WebSocket implementation: testers wanted
>> Message-ID:
>>         <
>> CAHixhFrA2FH6JOOFkd9sjBtgvBKEO6CZ9K9T-NdKf8PvXTiG2A@mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>>
>> The latest dev build of Chrome includes a new WebSocket implementation
>> behind an experimental flag. If you have version 36.0.1933.0 or greater,
>> you can enable it using the "Enable experimental Web Platform features"
>> flag in about:flags.
>>
>> An easy way to distinguish the different implementations is that the
>> stable
>> implementation does not set the "Accept-Language:" header, whereas the new
>> implementation does. You can examine the headers by opening the Network
>> panel in "Developer Tools" before creating the WebSocket connection.
>>
>> A known issue with the new implementation is that RFC6455 connection
>> throttling is not implemented yet. This will be done Real Soon Now.
>>
>> We are interested in hearing about any compatibility problems you might
>> encounter, either server side or in client libraries.
>>
>> Feedback welcome.
>>
>> Adam Rice
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> hybi mailing list
> hybi@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi
>
>