Re: [hybi] I-D Action: draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-09.txt

Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com> Tue, 21 June 2011 13:00 UTC

Return-Path: <gregw@intalio.com>
X-Original-To: hybi@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61E7511E80C1 for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 06:00:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.722
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.722 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.045, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1onOY5Ox9ljM for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 06:00:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vw0-f44.google.com (mail-vw0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E44C11E8083 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 06:00:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vws12 with SMTP id 12so1606488vws.31 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 06:00:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.76.4 with SMTP id g4mr5385300vdw.278.1308661234879; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 06:00:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.52.108.9 with HTTP; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 06:00:34 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikm33-EQDaRwJM8yJ34QgmrxN7FgQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110613233745.27187.94588.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <BANLkTinWuzj3V12eerjX0f13yYNdynTOjQ@mail.gmail.com> <4E004D3D.3020305@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <BANLkTi=T2YLpH4U=qduv_qFZVO3EyLPAUw@mail.gmail.com> <4E00569E.4030400@ericsson.com> <BANLkTikm33-EQDaRwJM8yJ34QgmrxN7FgQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 23:00:34 +1000
Message-ID: <BANLkTikhrkKjCbxJMuXLUMXSnXFmJ_2jjg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?I=F1aki_Baz_Castillo?= <ibc@aliax.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: hybi@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [hybi] I-D Action: 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: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 13:00:36 -0000

On 21 June 2011 19:04, Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> wrote:
> IMHO this WG is becoming to much "special"

Well there is something a bit special about this protocol.

We are encouraged to put draft implementations out into the wild so
that we can get some wider experience and feedback (working code
etc.).  But to do this means that the draft protocol is enabled in
browsers that are widely distributed, but also have a wide range of
update policies. It is not uncommon for a browser not to be updated
for many years, or put on a mobile device and never updated.

The result is that draft versions implemented are likely to be in
circulation for a long time.

Having the draft version in the handshake has proven a very workable
solution that prevents the heuristic version determination that was
previously necessary.  Is there any alternative solution?