IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] Dave's Framing Proposal

Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) <ifette@google.com> Thu, 05 August 2010 23:38 UTC

Return-Path: <ifette@google.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 AD92C3A689E for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Aug 2010 16:38:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.389
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.389 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.288, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 0PH+UGvz++qR for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Aug 2010 16:38:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (smtp-out.google.com [216.239.44.51]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 506863A6A92 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Aug 2010 16:38:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hpaq13.eem.corp.google.com (hpaq13.eem.corp.google.com [172.25.149.13]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id o75NcLXr007699 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Aug 2010 16:38:22 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1281051502; bh=OgdpOZ1eoRNBVZoOEAhyeF/+VtU=; h=MIME-Version:Reply-To:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: Subject:From:To:Cc:Content-Type; b=HoXZMS/8F65ayx9TGrtZwixOjbR08BKa1wwSJTjOdLL+4ap36ns6cs3+J10kdNR9f 0jMhlHoogEtYsXFJD3RYA==
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date: message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type:x-system-of-record; b=AQaKCZ6y24vhpGEjFEH4cVGMTNegECWuSUj3/NDWgjfn9fQhhkhBsvQ0CH2D3yrHb DmCSX2JNZDQE9rypD/4AQ==
Received: from gyb13 (gyb13.prod.google.com [10.243.49.77]) by hpaq13.eem.corp.google.com with ESMTP id o75Nbeth017277 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Aug 2010 16:38:20 -0700
Received: by gyb13 with SMTP id 13so4119963gyb.35 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Thu, 05 Aug 2010 16:38:20 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.151.149.5 with SMTP id b5mr4998316ybo.190.1281051053667; Thu, 05 Aug 2010 16:30:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.150.67.19 with HTTP; Thu, 5 Aug 2010 16:30:53 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <2286.1281050638.500945@puncture>
References: <2286.1281041555.477702@puncture> <4C5B2A05.6000209@mail-abuse.org> <AANLkTimm8G9Y9d4Gx0oZ9KgqDQo902VVXvf0mExjJpjr@mail.gmail.com> <2286.1281046946.682509@puncture> <AANLkTi=5fY8xHcTZPsatVW8rc3SUy6Aw4e86d_2Y4UNG@mail.gmail.com> <2286.1281050307.885298@puncture> <2286.1281050638.500945@puncture>
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2010 16:30:53 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=UK3syhvoa4WaU0wFrhOiKjrQLNHJOGqiP-+h3@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ)" <ifette@google.com>
To: Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001517511490fe37fa048d1bf054"
X-System-Of-Record: true
Cc: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [hybi] Dave's Framing Proposal
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: ifette@google.com
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: Thu, 05 Aug 2010 23:38:12 -0000

On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net> wrote:

> On Fri Aug  6 00:18:27 2010, Dave Cridland wrote:
>
>> On Thu Aug  5 23:54:47 2010, Greg Wilkins wrote:
>>
>>> But I think your proposal has value even if it was implemented with
>>> variable lengths, so I think it worthwhile to consider your proposal
>>> in two parts so that any goodness that it might have with metadata  per
>>> frame will not be lost in endless debates about length encodings.
>>>
>>
>> I don't think there is nearly as much.
>>
>
> To put it another way, I'm not terribly interested in "I think I'd like
> this more if". I'm not even that interested in "This is great".
>
> I'm only interested in "I cannot use such a design because".
>
>
I find it a bit hard with all these proposals going around to evaluate the
tradeoffs of N+1 over N. Could you state why you find your proposal to be
advantageous to "Take V" [1], key differences, and why those key differences
matter? I don't mean to say my proposal is great / really great / perfect,
just that I am having trouble understanding what you see as advantages in
your proposal? In V, I tried to leave out as much contentious things as
possible such that for a client/server/intermediary who wish to be
blissfully ignorant of extensions, normal messages are as small as possible,
and intermediaries that don't understand the extensions don't even see that
there is extension data (modulo fragmentation, which would be rather
perilous as an extension).

At the end of the day we do need to build some sort of consensus, so I
personally took an approach I hoped would meet people's requirements and
give on some of the other things I felt strongly about (like fixed-length
length encoding) so that we could move towards consensus (hopefully).

[1] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi/current/msg02924.html




>
> Dave.
> --
> Dave Cridland - mailto:dave@cridland.net - xmpp:dwd@dave.cridland.net<xmpp%3Adwd@dave.cridland.net>
>  - acap://acap.dave.cridland.net/byowner/user/dwd/bookmarks/
>  - http://dave.cridland.net/
> Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade
> _______________________________________________
> hybi mailing list
> hybi@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email