Re: [hybi] More feedback on WebSockets

Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com> Tue, 27 October 2009 10:13 UTC

Return-Path: <gregw@webtide.com>
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 6791A3A681D for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 03:13:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.231
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.231 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.368, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 uOoaAhY9ZBNi for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 03:13:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yw0-f183.google.com (mail-yw0-f183.google.com [209.85.211.183]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 771353A6A07 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 03:13:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ywh13 with SMTP id 13so16216828ywh.29 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 03:13:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.150.239.15 with SMTP id m15mr7298435ybh.336.1256638423942; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 03:13:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?10.10.1.9? (60-242-119-126.tpgi.com.au [60.242.119.126]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 14sm328828gxk.10.2009.10.27.03.13.41 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 27 Oct 2009 03:13:43 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4AE6C7D1.30003@webtide.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 21:13:37 +1100
From: Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
References: <FDC38D4B-AB64-4F6B-B569-81D7A56DEC8D@mnot.net> <Pine.LNX.4.62.0910270912040.9145@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0910270912040.9145@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: hybi@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [hybi] More feedback on WebSockets
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
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: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:13:34 -0000

Ian Hickson wrote:
> I disagree that the current handshake isn't like HTTP enough, though. The 
> request is fully HTTP-compliant. What value would there be in relaxing the 
> rules on what WebSocket clients should send in the request? I don't 
> understand the real-world case you are concerned about.

What about a load balancer in front of the server that inserts
a cookie or X-Forwarded-For header into all HTTP requests that
it forwards.

This will probably be harmless with regards to the subsequent
WS connection, but it will break the handshake so there will
not be a subsequent WS connection.


regards