Re: [hybi] #4: handshake does not work properly with HTTP reverse proxy.

"hybi issue tracker" <trac@tools.ietf.org> Mon, 30 August 2010 22:23 UTC

Return-Path: <trac@tools.ietf.org>
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 7041D3A6882 for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 15:23:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.573
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.573 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.027, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, 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 FU9AH-ahQcP0 for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 15:23:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zinfandel.tools.ietf.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:1890:1112:1::2a]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1554E3A67B6 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 15:23:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=zinfandel.tools.ietf.org) by zinfandel.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <trac@tools.ietf.org>) id 1OqClt-0000FN-D2; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 15:24:09 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: hybi issue tracker <trac@tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Version: 0.11.7
Precedence: bulk
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
X-Mailer: Trac 0.11.7, by Edgewall Software
To: ian@hixie.ch, ifette@google.com, salvatore.loreto@ericsson.com, sm+ietf@elandsys.com
X-Trac-Project: hybi
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 22:24:09 -0000
X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/hybi/
X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/hybi/trac/ticket/4#comment:4
Message-ID: <077.16770a1037c185a3fde75a9b560a236a@tools.ietf.org>
References: <068.da8db0c773647cb0ed73d576f39e93ee@tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 4
In-Reply-To: <068.da8db0c773647cb0ed73d576f39e93ee@tools.ietf.org>
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: ::1
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ian@hixie.ch, ifette@google.com, salvatore.loreto@ericsson.com, sm+ietf@elandsys.com, hybi@ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac@tools.ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zinfandel.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Cc: hybi@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [hybi] #4: handshake does not work properly with HTTP reverse proxy.
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
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: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 22:23:47 -0000

#4: handshake does not work properly with HTTP reverse proxy.
-------------------------------------------+--------------------------------
 Reporter:  salvatore.loreto@…             |       Owner:     
     Type:  defect                         |      Status:  new
 Priority:  critical                       |   Milestone:     
Component:  thewebsocketprotocol           |     Version:     
 Severity:  Active WG Document             |    Keywords:     
-------------------------------------------+--------------------------------

Comment(by ifette@…):

 I definitely want to figure out how to fix this issue. That said, even
 reading the linked messages, I don't see any solutions readily available.
 Putting the 8 bytes in a header seems to imply that we're not actually
 certain that the proxy is capable of forwarding the data correctly (the
 data that would be sent on the first message). This seems undesirable.
 Adding a 2nd RTT is also desirable.

 From the referenced message http://www.ietf.org/mail-
 archive/web/hybi/current/msg03238.html

 "Note that this data is used for three things :
   - detection of cross-protocol communication
   - ensure that no cache will return a cached content
   - ensure that intermediaries correctly forward data after the 101

 "The first point and second points are not changed with a header. The
 third point changes slightly. With the key in the data, it was able
 to detect some of the proxies which would reset the connection during
 the handshake. With the key3 in a header, it will only detect the
 connection reset when trying to send data for the first time. However,
 neither method detects intermediaries which don't forward request body
 and remain stuck on it, so on this point there is no change."

 The status quo is also undesirable as we may hang on some proxies, which
 also is a bad state to be in.

 My understanding of this issue is that we are still looking for a
 solution. As such, I am not planning to address this in -01, but will make
 a note of the issue and that it is still open.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/hybi/trac/ticket/4#comment:4>
hybi <http://tools.ietf.org/hybi/>
The Hypertext-Bidirectional (HyBi) working group will seek
standardization of one approach to maintain bidirectional
communications between the HTTP client, server and intermediate
entities, which will provide more efficiency compared to the current
use of hanging requests.