[hybi] WebSocket & HTTP Keep-Alive

"Greg Longtin" <Greg@ChampionEnt.net> Sat, 26 March 2011 13:33 UTC

Return-Path: <Greg@ChampionEnt.net>
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 422D028C119 for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 26 Mar 2011 06:33:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.679
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.679 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.920, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_24=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, SARE_LWSHORTT=1.24]
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 eny-rUQMLf0m for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 26 Mar 2011 06:33:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpout-2.iphouse.net (smtpout-2.iphouse.net [209.240.70.141]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F81528C11C for <hybi@ietf.org>; Sat, 26 Mar 2011 06:33:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpout-2.iphouse.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by outbound-clamsmtpd.iphouse.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC4841CCDA for <hybi@ietf.org>; Sat, 26 Mar 2011 08:35:24 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from GJL8710w (longtin.dsl.visi.com [209.98.144.159]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtpout-2.iphouse.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 82B201CCA8 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Sat, 26 Mar 2011 08:35:24 -0500 (CDT)
From: Greg Longtin <Greg@ChampionEnt.net>
To: hybi <hybi@ietf.org>
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2011 08:35:23 -0500
Message-ID: <000201cbebba$a9375010$fba5f030$@net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AcvruqiDovxyIwb/RV6ujwnTh+Ak4Q==
Content-Language: en-us
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP
Subject: [hybi] WebSocket & HTTP Keep-Alive
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: Sat, 26 Mar 2011 13:33:51 -0000

To all,

Good day.  I don't want to use the term socket, so I'll define a channel as
a unique server ip:port and a client ip:port pair.  With HTTP Keep-Alive,
these channels may stay open after a HTTP request / response, creating a
(short term) group of channels.

The WS specs do not seem to address whether client can use an existing open
HTTP channel to begin a persistent WS connection.  Similarly, once a WS
channel is open, can a client use it for a HTTP request?

>From an abstract perspective, who cares.  From the perspective of server
implementation, it gets interesting in terms of closing Keep-Alive
connections and who listens to what.  Simply put, it complicates things a
bit.

This issue is only a problem when both HTTP and WS are on the same (server)
port.

If I haven't read the specs well enough, please accept my apology.  BTW, in
a past job I dealt with contracts between somewhat unfriendly parties.

Greg Longtin