Re: [hybi] Proposal: HTTP upgrade process

[Willy Tarreau <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 12:18:58PM +0200, Vladimir Katardjiev wrote:
> Hm. It seems I accidentally sent out the wrong version of the mail. I didn't intend to sound as if I was arguing for the eight bytes themselves. What I thought I wrote in addition was that the intention was for the 8 bytes to be functionally part of the WS stream, so figure this:
> 
> 1) HTTP Upgrade request
> 2) 101 response
> 3) 8 bytes random req
> 4) WS OK response

Yes, that's it. And the 8 bytes random could even be a PING message.

> Since this would be 2 RTTs (1-2 + 3-4), in -76, 1&3 and 2&4 were baked into each-other.

no, not necessarily 2 RTTs if the sender sends the 1+3 at the same time,
then the responder can receive 1, send 2, then receive 3 and send 4.

Please check the various cases of HTTP vs round trips in my earlier e-mail here :

   http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi/current/msg03238.html

> I don't necessarily agree with that; I'd prefer separation of concerns, but I was mainly intending to explain why those eight bytes found their way into the text in the first place.

It was to ensure that intermediaries were able to forward them. But in my
opinion, it does not bring that many advantages over sending them as headers.

Regards,
Willy