IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] [whatwg] Web sockets and existing HTTP stacks

Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com> Tue, 22 December 2009 02:23 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 7F4343A69BF for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Dec 2009 18:23:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.518
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.518 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.081, 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 Dc8xmjjn5g7B for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Dec 2009 18:23:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yx0-f192.google.com (mail-yx0-f192.google.com [209.85.210.192]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 758193A6959 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Dec 2009 18:23:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: by yxe30 with SMTP id 30so6621580yxe.29 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Dec 2009 18:22:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.101.121.16 with SMTP id y16mr9242706anm.95.1261448561471; Mon, 21 Dec 2009 18:22:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?10.10.1.11? (60-242-119-126.tpgi.com.au [60.242.119.126]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 15sm2608276gxk.8.2009.12.21.18.22.37 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 21 Dec 2009 18:22:40 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4B302D5C.3080904@webtide.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 13:22:20 +1100
From: Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
References: <557ae280911171402v7546e5e7n93a1e57f87dc10e5@mail.gmail.com> <557ae280911200711i5493e654k67c1f5f07336bfb9@mail.gmail.com> <Pine.LNX.4.62.0912032347360.15540@hixie.dreamhostps.com> <4B2C1D52.9020505@webtide.com> <5c902b9e0912181640n497169cdrfa71f9a2908e6ef3@mail.gmail.com> <20091219005442.GA10949@shareable.org> <5c902b9e0912181711o65f31266yd86b8db618a1dcb1@mail.gmail.com> <B0B57710-91BC-4CEC-ABA6-50318038E64B@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <B0B57710-91BC-4CEC-ABA6-50318038E64B@mnot.net>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: whatwg@whatwg.org, hybi@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [hybi] [whatwg] Web sockets and existing HTTP stacks
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, 22 Dec 2009 02:23:01 -0000

Mark Nottingham wrote:
> There was a fairly long thread initiated by Ian on squid-dev, FYI:
>   http://marc.info/?t=124700786100001&r=1&w=2
> 
> That discussion is very similar to this one.

This is looking more an more like a hostile takeover
bid of port 80.

Whenever the objection "it breaks my existing HTTP
stuff" is raised, the response appears that the HTTP
infrastructure should stop trying the "share" the port
with websocket.

Does ANYBODY else other than Ian think that the
websocket upgrade request/response should be anything
other than a semantically legal HTTP upgrade
request/response?

regards

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email