IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] Straw poll: Do you miss interjectable WebSocket level control frame? (was: Re: Discontinuation of mux ...)

Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com> Fri, 28 February 2014 18:00 UTC

Return-Path: <tyoshino@google.com>
X-Original-To: hybi@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E8E61A00FF for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 10:00:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.925
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.925 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5qzV2YDLZEDf for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 10:00:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wg0-x22e.google.com (mail-wg0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::22e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB1171A00D9 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 10:00:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wg0-f46.google.com with SMTP id z12so856771wgg.29 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 10:00:52 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=7bY9kfNt9ojJQjSnBpd/+B1vDwa++/j2x05KmIUzh6M=; b=LlCxt1UY1DVDsFygZljpn5ac1fvfFfTgIwQbyFZY2uu1FEcFq8d8no+LzD3cyjWIXm G+nthqrPnoZK0CGCncQWvxS0lf78TcbQrJl18CaGLcmOTsG07S6sJlKvsPQfiRATaydN +GbhExloe+wP2h5ZvJq7qTex8jKbmhvZmwdqEvehSa8Zz2Bs/GUImbVGFPtt2V/SCoL8 QsYsYuRYc0QA8ivNZIebGFwNVtStnhRjWmyJ5kyJcLmF09xeRA2dXaUbmK5SScWM9LRC rZ1cB194Ah1xVKyUqnYTq1+3nE/Yt40lbuMee8SLoKavaZzkaNMJflLkZtNaaG8qYyAS qXVw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=7bY9kfNt9ojJQjSnBpd/+B1vDwa++/j2x05KmIUzh6M=; b=SRJLuv73ESZ2oU0aUwKd7sMf+X4YTulWMWwNAxIjDc1iLpuSC8Uqg6GjbQz9Z2dzPC eP3fiuqhLHBq1AbK2hBzMrQ9UEktBJypmPbE4TV2uU8DeUDZVzhQxSfVQcUBFWVScoyP A+wh9VV6XSZl0e5jjwf8iNr5Wg6aMMFMe+EZIn5gdHd6JJ36BHIArUxenhmSazzx8Lki VWAa8BwS6VQ/KQ5NlcaXTjvwu8uOvOQ9hkTEzpjKhOrVb+2hG3PPOG3CvQ7HmkTTesNP B+rCitEBan29hRyaOHlW+CKpCdRLKDDFzM8LiYLqfUsCMTw9xmhBxVYxidTHFLzzcYEq LFFg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk6X9Q4LhJG+dbG3ZdQEpbHCf5jeeIqQtfxM7YxC/4ULvgmLYo5B5ZfABDP3+1YFPeIyalYnvNgiWtHRS8G5ak0DzaVCZn0mb43kLokAm9Vh6TA98b6hceu6c3W1rl6stL2VWApfgmzjmo6Jht6F3XyLFkCO8EoQ6VNdCsH4AQynUmUqJ2eKExRqhdAOm2XUbOojn4W
X-Received: by 10.180.19.138 with SMTP id f10mr3828596wie.11.1393610452325; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 10:00:52 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.194.8.231 with HTTP; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 10:00:32 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <AE8FD8AD-C52F-4E6C-9229-7990402C9414@zaphoyd.com>
References: <CAH9hSJbjQNKnZTJmBFtU8MgmnRTYjPopC4oP_78bWUGap-9CvA@mail.gmail.com> <CAH9hSJbBmvNPBSSAk-khdWXgWw0GTt0FG3KsdzYeJcfiAPDk0A@mail.gmail.com> <CAHixhFq=wfmYH8-ij_WtsQLN=NUTJwRQ=k8jCPepQDM8V8ZZYA@mail.gmail.com> <CABihn6EN7V6XEwf6NWn78orxvr3XjGHxROJC4JjQ6RYYKEeCug@mail.gmail.com> <CACuKZqHNoR5GQmWyzbXAszZCOT2P4pjSmT3SF6ZG3X7hTY=1xw@mail.gmail.com> <CABihn6GC4VM2AHza-F7ML=FfHLZu7FNqx+BhbuVsfJLWk0P92w@mail.gmail.com> <CAH9hSJbSfQ2Abp6oLifi0dx4TZENzm2QRn8zMQfAv=vw+H12sw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1402261734120.31525@ps20323.dreamhostps.com> <CAH9hSJZs01ZuimkLWat8Au+HZ5MPp33x+V5CTbG9OUia=S-8Jw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1402261756240.31525@ps20323.dreamhostps.com> <CAH9hSJbEJpUeDjpNsroUZ1CuD+Jifq5qakCjmfviZjSgvHBmrA@mail.gmail.com> <AE8FD8AD-C52F-4E6C-9229-7990402C9414@zaphoyd.com>
From: Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com>
Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2014 03:00:32 +0900
Message-ID: <CAH9hSJbeRsmFdzF5yDwr7aGMyhz0CMmMhQ8MdFonkHZ0Xu89aA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Thorson <webmaster@zaphoyd.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="bcaec53d550df77e0e04f37b3751"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hybi/z9YvhMnJd6fn5Od8JQDH1o6L6Ss
Cc: "hybi@ietf.org" <hybi@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [hybi] Straw poll: Do you miss interjectable WebSocket level control frame? (was: Re: Discontinuation of mux ...)
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 18:00:57 -0000

On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 1:16 AM, Peter Thorson <webmaster@zaphoyd.com> wrote:

> To clarify here. This is a decision made that affects the W3C browser API
> only, correct? It does not imply that injecting a close frame into the
> outgoing message to cleanly cancel and exit is violating RFC6455?
>

Right. Only Hixie expressed his thoughts and interpretation of the spec for
now. There should be more discussion for this.


>
> On Feb 26, 2014, at 12:08 , Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 2:58 AM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 27 Feb 2014, Takeshi Yoshino wrote:
>> >
>> > Yeah, it's kinda twist.
>> >
>> > But also it's not strange that people wonder if close frame interjection
>> > like this is ok or not. Actually, even ping/pong sending are not
>> > explicitly allowed to be inserted between "Send a WebSocket Message"
>> > algorithm.
>>
>> If it's unclear, we should update the protocol spec to make it clear.
>>
>>
> I can't file a ticket.
>
> Sal, could you file a ticket for this for update in the future?
>
>
>>
>> > > If you send a bunch of messages, then start the closing handshake,
>> > > then the messages should all be sent. I don't think there's anything
>> > > in either spec that would allow the handshake to jump ahead.
>> >
>> > It would be nice if you add some note to the API spec to say "queuing"
>> > doesn't have any implication that the closing handshake can jump in in
>> > response to Zhong's question above.
>>
>> Can you file a bug explaining specifically what needs clarifying at the
>> API level? I'll get to it ASAP (I'm in the middle of an edit on focus
>> navigation, so I can't fix it right now). http://whatwg.org/newbug
>
>
> Thanks. Filed.
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24824
>
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email