Re: [hybi] Call for interest: multiplexing dedicated for WebSocket

[Takeshi Yoshino <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 7:01 PM, Tobias Oberstein <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> Sure, multiplexing at the WS level would allow to create generic
> concentrators, but a generic concentrator could not map incoming
> connections to backend boxes based on app data like UserID etc for sharding
> etc.
>

Right


> However, when running _different_ apps on the same device connecting to
> the same origin,


You meant same ws:// address?


> """
>
4.2.1. Frame mapping
>
>    One WebSocket frame is mapped into one proceeding SPDY HEADERS frame
>    and following plural SPDY data frames. The SPDY HEADERS frame must
>    contain WebSocket frame fields and following SPDY data frames contain
>    payload data. These data frames are free to be reframed.
>
>    This plan doesn't care about overheads.
> """
>
> This seems somehow straightforward, but introduces inefficiencies: the
> overhead per WS message is significantly increased and an additional
> framing layer that allows reframing costs CPU cycles.
>

Thanks


> Btw: assuming SPDY runs over TLS exclusively, is there any need for WS
> frame masking anymore?
>

See this post by Eric about BEAST attack. I think it's not easy to conclude
that mask is unncessary for wss.
http://www.educatedguesswork.org/2011/09/security_impact_of_the_rizzodu.html