[hybi] draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-09.txt

Dan Adkins <dadkins@google.com> Wed, 15 June 2011 20:39 UTC

Return-Path: <dadkins@google.com>
X-Original-To: hybi@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8FD611E8136 for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:39:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.977
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iVnOwm61jY6u for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:39:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (smtp-out.google.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F68B11E8080 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:39:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kpbe14.cbf.corp.google.com (kpbe14.cbf.corp.google.com []) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id p5FKdhsJ001765 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:39:43 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1308170384; bh=8KveHLzwqBN+lZBVXbo9pAQwQi8=; h=MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Content-Type; b=WiIcoFFR+qKKnUNyfXNbwPc2lssYcrXp2gdyvLHex0B1I1CHp45zYRUbv1EwZNK77 BuPkQadVjv6aOXZrzfLFw==
Received: from ywf9 (ywf9.prod.google.com []) by kpbe14.cbf.corp.google.com with ESMTP id p5FKcsgk013015 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:39:42 -0700
Received: by ywf9 with SMTP id 9so842219ywf.22 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:39:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=izHMYGUU2ofRcONKjDVuHK6JUXU0bELiYQ1i9RHIjPY=; b=pH09Rl3Vk6J3RaCgWKjn0VInH7K1C+NnfjtLv13sa1fBh4rDylfLG0i6K9slk9oD3x gTBJhbrlvTFl+Tm1VpEw==
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=google.com; s=beta; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=SoaGkkF3yNxxfymuxAxQte/wYZlipgORcfoG0I6kuepSr10QdezDKRl8a6dAV72AEJ ZyVq2DPixmVCqVFD5goQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with SMTP id s6mr70075ybm.130.1308170382094; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:39:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:39:41 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:39:41 -0700
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=xgArOEPP2ePmXaSax46T+CQ+Qqj2THgxDLboktjPCgQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dan Adkins <dadkins@google.com>
To: hybi@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-System-Of-Record: true
Subject: [hybi] draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-09.txt
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 20:39:45 -0000


Sec 1.3. Opening Handshake

   Headers in the handshake are sent by the client in a random order;
   the order is not meaningful.

Saying "random order" here is misleading; it implies that the client
must shuffle the headers (I understand old versions of the protocol
required this.)  If the order is not meaningful, then it is perfectly
fine for an implementation to always send them in the same order.

I think the wording from RFC 2616 (HTTP/1.1) is clearer:

   The order in which header fields with differing field names are
   received is not significant.