IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] I-D Action: draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-09.txt

Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> Tue, 21 June 2011 13:15 UTC

Return-Path: <ibc@aliax.net>
X-Original-To: hybi@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6878311E80C1 for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 06:15:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.662
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.662 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.015, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tCX-F57jkQ1R for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 06:15:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qy0-f172.google.com (mail-qy0-f172.google.com [209.85.216.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D0B811E808D for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 06:15:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qyk9 with SMTP id 9so2521115qyk.10 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 06:15:50 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.7.212 with SMTP id e20mr5011193qce.192.1308662150171; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 06:15:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.181.209 with HTTP; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 06:15:50 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikhrkKjCbxJMuXLUMXSnXFmJ_2jjg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110613233745.27187.94588.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <BANLkTinWuzj3V12eerjX0f13yYNdynTOjQ@mail.gmail.com> <4E004D3D.3020305@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <BANLkTi=T2YLpH4U=qduv_qFZVO3EyLPAUw@mail.gmail.com> <4E00569E.4030400@ericsson.com> <BANLkTikm33-EQDaRwJM8yJ34QgmrxN7FgQ@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTikhrkKjCbxJMuXLUMXSnXFmJ_2jjg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 15:15:50 +0200
Message-ID: <BANLkTik1qS=HS887b6DKPzCr-fEKZvv_jw@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?I=C3=B1aki_Baz_Castillo?= <ibc@aliax.net>
To: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: hybi@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [hybi] I-D Action: draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-09.txt
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 13:15:53 -0000

2011/6/21 Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>om>:
> Having the draft version in the handshake has proven a very workable
> solution that prevents the heuristic version determination that was
> previously necessary.  Is there any alternative solution?

Having experimental working implementations in order to improve a spec
or detect/fix issues is great. Relying on such implementations is not
so great, even less when you are talking about widely extended web
browsers. In other words, I don't consider "polite" to experiment with
the rest of the world just to realize of issues in a no mature
specification (which is still a draft).

IMHO browser vendors could provide an experimental version with
WebSocket support so developers and people in this WG can test it
against the current specification. Ok, there it could make sense a
*temporal* header like "X-WebSocket-TMP-Version". But such
version/revision value should have no relationship with the final
protocol version (i.e. "1.0") which will be submitted to the IETF.
This is, don't mix experiments with the final spec.

Just my opinion. Regards.



-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc@aliax.net>

v2.2.1 | Report a Bug | By Email