IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Jmap] Benjamin Schwartz comments on draft-ietf-jmap-websocket-05

Ken Murchison <murch@fastmail.com> Wed, 18 March 2020 18:04 UTC

Return-Path: <murch@fastmail.com>
X-Original-To: jmap@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: jmap@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A9F13A19A3 for <jmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 11:04:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.085
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.085 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, T_SPF_TEMPERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fastmail.com header.b=SSPVo72s; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=jJF+lmnc
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 7mFaF8G0kfLn for <jmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 11:04:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A30783A199D for <jmap@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 11:03:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 229305C01C5; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 14:03:52 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 18 Mar 2020 14:03:52 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.com; h= subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-type; s=fm2; bh=jqIh3p09Y/FdKz4Q2WTxKkM1mOn 2CdEE/YRW7JvDx/M=; b=SSPVo72sUq5ukM27OcblCs56vRxK4PfM988vYxIFv2r kfMQFFcIJeKhBmAvZ2TEC6bPE690QdPBZTOyvcw89yZ9YjsmdcTGmLHIEvD5UBaw 7BQ/2PrtUCs5V13PgxWgWWAkqfcWqX3vhfpgkrP5hORfSEu2BjZDCd8loTqWi93u llENWIpZETRWsNEdZt63hrVnBc16NUN0xkccsSHQuvzEdbWbhKLSYq4iPHIKh4lI A7sAA2rPwdaKYJmJwMm1YV9MoC4rOZLiTQhnn+b5ZbDL4exCIlXzy4tn1GMpx+eJ FuadR8xrReq73XdWG5Ojm9YBTJd1JGQZD4R+2gOxIKg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=jqIh3p 09Y/FdKz4Q2WTxKkM1mOn2CdEE/YRW7JvDx/M=; b=jJF+lmncYB4yvnhcVXYvG7 obk5QvbK8T8j4qrfgsfgg4HNFZxrUyydZc1ytZdTHSJwtFsgF3iLdFbKISWnSqC+ THRNzUZFb7revdDkAzjHcw/3hgy7atHyVOYRANxGDpKjJDQfVjK89y4BNvvQxIxY vyf65Z5RG8Z1/abyI4CHOXohCRynE7VOXznbZ1CfdGgIFFBcC8edcDuZlKN+/dff hSNBDi9AkJXoC0ByedrTQTAz3Lea67GZluc4CW6wFAMWS0IqmBSQF1nRkMl50eUA B3bEpbN0WVzXmipL4/EqauDxhV/CeYS7uvaeHhiDOeTHHEtZ7XhZacx03WfbWirA ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:h2JyXin6uCB1-dXf8v6AyKLzFmxjx0ZAdV4_HZtXFCzHW8mTiHa0wA>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrudefjedguddtvdcutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefuvfhfhfhokffffgggjggtsegrtderredtfeejnecuhfhrohhmpefmvghn ucfouhhrtghhihhsohhnuceomhhurhgthhesfhgrshhtmhgrihhlrdgtohhmqeenucfkph epjeegrdejjedrkeehrddvhedtnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghm pehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhurhgthhesfhgrshhtmhgrihhlrdgtohhm
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:h2JyXuFOdOw8TYfosGsgQLF9h5XH9bSO-Htj1kaDw6ZOaFgv5iMMBA> <xmx:h2JyXrqoesPmqcoPDDFv3xF1_MuR8bcVyKr1fPOwwMAHOjBnTC8kLA> <xmx:h2JyXq78R1WVZA5hcpX9wglUWtfn4v5PGsVDbPsHU22LZxywfgHugg> <xmx:iGJyXq4q5VYV88UYXoH8Kkbd7K3RXPSHlxjuZLqKTbRf0PFD24OxsQ>
Received: from localhost.localdomain (cpe-74-77-85-250.buffalo.res.rr.com [74.77.85.250]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 39B5730618C1; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 14:03:51 -0400 (EDT)
To: Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>, Benjamin Schwartz <bemasc@google.com>
Cc: jmap@ietf.org
References: <0f7388d8-b420-469f-8d5a-da5fb0bcf27a@www.fastmail.com> <2cc03bd6-48e3-3953-f9ba-59fbc26054a7@fastmail.com> <CAHbrMsCkCxkDHy92N1uFM7sG=DUTS9R+iQihyxU0xPt29jF7gg@mail.gmail.com> <533b2c05-eda9-48df-8564-50e14e43acc3@www.fastmail.com>
From: Ken Murchison <murch@fastmail.com>
Organization: FastMail US LLC
Message-ID: <7b28083d-a8ad-c7bb-838b-bd2cef6173d5@fastmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 14:03:51 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <533b2c05-eda9-48df-8564-50e14e43acc3@www.fastmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------79A927E493CED632D1FA87F6"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jmap/QfJe6j8YUtYlHMrqvIAc_ab6dbU>
Subject: Re: [Jmap] Benjamin Schwartz comments on draft-ietf-jmap-websocket-05
X-BeenThere: jmap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: JSON Message Access Protocol <jmap.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/jmap>, <mailto:jmap-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/jmap/>
List-Post: <mailto:jmap@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:jmap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jmap>, <mailto:jmap-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 18:04:08 -0000

On 3/18/20 1:23 PM, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
> Hi Ken,
>
> On Mon, Mar 9, 2020, at 8:02 PM, Ben Schwartz wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 8, 2020 at 3:16 PM Ken Murchison <murch@fastmail.com 
>> <mailto:murch@fastmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     On 2/21/20 7:45 AM, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>>
>
>>>     ## Section 4.3.2
>>>
>>>
>>>     Is “@type” now required on all Request/Response/Problem Details objects everywhere?  Does this update RFC 8620?
>>
>>
>>     Alexey, I'll let you decide is this document updates RFC 8620.
>>
>> My point is that the text is unclear.  I presume that the line "This 
>> specification adds two extra arguments to the Request object" doesn't 
>> apply to all Request objects, but only to Request objects that are 
>> sent over a WebSocket.  However, the text doesn't say that.  I would 
>> suggest noting that this specification uses an extended object 
>> encoding from RFC 8620, so that the distinction can be described 
>> explicitly.
> I think clarifying whether this is a generic extension or WebSocket 
> specific, would be useful.


draft -06 has language like the following for each object type:

The specification extends the Request object with two additional
    arguments when used over a WebSocket:


Is that sufficient or do you have some alternative text that you'd like 
to suggest?

-- 
Ken Murchison
Cyrus Development Team
Fastmail US LLC

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email