From nobody Mon Apr 18 19:14:16 2016 Return-Path: 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 B34F612DC99 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 18:13:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -107.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-107.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.996, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 FSMEkh4S8sAC for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 18:13:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1900:3001:11::31]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5605412D963 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 18:13:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 1AD9618000F; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 18:13:05 -0700 (PDT) To: ifette+ietf@google.com, Alexey.Melnikov@isode.com, ben@nostrum.com, alissa@cooperw.in, aamelnikov@fastmail.fm, Salvatore.Loreto@ericsson.com, Gabriel.Montenegro@microsoft.com X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php From: RFC Errata System Message-Id: <20160419011305.1AD9618000F@rfc-editor.org> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 18:13:05 -0700 (PDT) Archived-At: X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:14:15 -0700 Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, hybi@ietf.org, a.dunaev@nplab.ru Subject: [hybi] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6455 (4672) X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 01:13:35 -0000 The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6455, "The WebSocket Protocol". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6455&eid=4672 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Anton Dunaev Section: 5.6 Original Text ------------- Data frames (e.g., non-control frames) are identified by opcodes where the most significant bit of the opcode is 0. Currently defined opcodes for data frames include 0x1 (Text), 0x2 (Binary). Opcodes 0x3-0x7 are reserved for further non-control frames yet to be defined. Data frames carry application-layer and/or extension-layer data. The opcode determines the interpretation of the data: Text The "Payload data" is text data encoded as UTF-8. Note that a particular text frame might include a partial UTF-8 sequence; however, the whole message MUST contain valid UTF-8. Invalid UTF-8 in reassembled messages is handled as described in Section 8.1. Binary The "Payload data" is arbitrary binary data whose interpretation is solely up to the application layer. Corrected Text -------------- Data frames (i.e., non-control frames) are identified by opcodes where the most significant bit of the opcode is 0. Currently defined opcodes for data frames include 0x00 (Continuation), 0x1 (Text) and 0x2 (Binary). Opcodes 0x3-0x7 are reserved for further non-control frames yet to be defined. Data frames carry application-layer and/or extension-layer data. The opcode determines the interpretation of the data: Text The "Payload data" is text data encoded as UTF-8. Note that a particular text frame might include a partial UTF-8 sequence; however, the whole message MUST contain valid UTF-8. Invalid UTF-8 in reassembled messages is handled as described in Section 8.1. Binary The "Payload data" is arbitrary binary data whose interpretation is solely up to the application layer. Continuation These frames MUST be always preceeded by either Text or Binary frame with FIN bit clear (See Section 5.2). The "Payload data" contains next fragment (See section 5.4) of the message whose transmission were opened by the latest Text or Binary frame and MUST be interpreted in the same way as the initial fragment of the message. Notes ----- For any other opcode defined frames are explicitly listed and described in either Section 5.5 or Section 5.6. But continuation frame is not. Formally it matches definition of data frame (given in section 5.6) as the most significant bit of its opcode is 0. Logically it should be data frame too. But it is unclear whether there are two categories of frames (data and control) or the Continuation frame represents the third. One could guess though that Continuation frame is a data frame from the content of the section 5.5.1 stating that "An endpoint MAY delay sending a Close frame until its current message is sent (for instance, if the majority of a fragmented message is already sent, an endpoint MAY send the remaining fragments before sending a Close frame)". This fragment clarifies that Close frame is sent after an endpoint finished message transmission. Thus such interpreation would be consistent with the Section 5.5.1 stating that "The application MUST NOT send any more data frames after sending a Close frame". Instructions: ------------- This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC6455 (draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-17) -------------------------------------- Title : The WebSocket Protocol Publication Date : December 2011 Author(s) : I. Fette, A. Melnikov Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : BiDirectional or Server-Initiated HTTP APP Area : Applications Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG From nobody Thu Apr 28 01:36:39 2016 Return-Path: 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 5349212D5DC for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 01:36:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.996 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.996 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.996, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=isode.com 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 4jaqy4m0J4bv for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 01:36:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from waldorf.isode.com (waldorf.isode.com [62.232.206.188]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A42BE12B021 for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 01:36:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1461832595; d=isode.com; s=selector; i=@isode.com; bh=IOgZ8in1OnNVxeIJ8C7HrQhVYc7pXTsgDBm14ijAJ5M=; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description; b=MVXLQcfMutbcZJb3pRDEs0U6CZgK2YuGtDiI7vyegOLEj/QgSbCbLtrDJKuQ3n8AzK84rt z0xNlBSqaAKSdTiMQrCAwGd5nJYfc6XMKumiY5BFScD9bux0QO603nrgu8AS4JcKsCpuHh ayo+EsqumcJTI1gfAjN/bWEKpwYXH6s=; Received: from [192.168.0.6] (cpc5-nmal20-2-0-cust24.19-2.cable.virginm.net [92.234.84.25]) by waldorf.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPSA id ; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 09:36:35 +0100 X-SMTP-Protocol-Errors: PIPELINING From: Alexey Melnikov Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 09:44:05 +0100 Message-Id: To: hybi@ietf.org X-Mailer: iPad Mail (13E238) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-5700FE75-D192-4668-AAF7-716CB103ED17 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: [hybi] Update to IANA registration procedure for websocket sub-protocol registry X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 08:36:38 -0000 --Apple-Mail-5700FE75-D192-4668-AAF7-716CB103ED17 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, As per discussion on the mailing list, I started IETF LC on this short docum= ent: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hardie-rfc6455-iana-clarification/ Best Regards, Alexey --Apple-Mail-5700FE75-D192-4668-AAF7-716CB103ED17 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi,
As per discussion on the mailing list, I started IETF LC on this short document:


Best Regards,
Alexey

--Apple-Mail-5700FE75-D192-4668-AAF7-716CB103ED17-- From nobody Thu Apr 28 01:57:51 2016 Return-Path: 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 0CC5D12B05B for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 01:57:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.696 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.696 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.996, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com 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 7FKK-ZR4NUlv for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 01:57:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ig0-x233.google.com (mail-ig0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4273812B044 for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 01:57:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ig0-x233.google.com with SMTP id u10so97635682igr.1 for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 01:57:48 -0700 (PDT) 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; bh=SBmJI95SX8C5/ey7GFXQfNIiZj7f+Jv18ZeBm8YXlRs=; b=RoBEw8tA0QweD9weClh6yV7m/8SNXGEEWFGw0h1l0URjqaGokyTuTuMo8736FpA+wM aUaWnDG2e2+HYVhuqUgp9XAc/D7wB886kV45fyvURwJ2vEy5ej5Mz9dphSA1oki9KGUx u+AOkdca4/cbSoONlMEPiO07LkcVHUClRf6z1g4RwQLfvo6e4TqWBH2wcq0qe00eCrxk 04dQ+b9G/dANTnZGmCBhSw1VtKBuu93GonLixMxWHWTQ3wIl4KtBcCsbk2k6nUyuF2i/ +H7U3qC4kTphpEgDsjaUJsZi/MFGSv+7WVQyyId4jSxqc1NRzIYzYJfIypr8kaxhsIwG vPPg== 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; bh=SBmJI95SX8C5/ey7GFXQfNIiZj7f+Jv18ZeBm8YXlRs=; b=DhGg9IRanBDjHBaun8FP9wF1EBlUwtppYIAgvYMMZtW18t2R4UNDLC5GZLt/q238AS xfbVXQt2K1wh+iltn8bXu8AbYQmExEduSrtrpDxq6csLE1KJ9SLzYuY7hCibp9hrzHiV 3xiUqmvj8EDjwTzyvzo92I9oLyGplRkJgUQL6oWGsdjgT/VoKqunzIeFPkgDIizKEXP1 fl0eEzsA8FsmXLpBYfwInk2gxhanh07RhXBBeSev3WrCM4ImZkuLPzFTBVGkdDNV6DNL EUkF0NqvMt7pXH+DOzRY0rS6qkXGjBXebkF2YhgzGqYFsoNWVyMhHcJS8HJyt2QRc5D6 FhiA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FXSUHfv2/lXYnXWh753kEkYKssOsfnRqr6S1pplsgTi1LKpH5L0jSaYaheSptC5UpYdJHcVZOsE6VNR3EM5 X-Received: by 10.50.247.148 with SMTP id ye20mr32209779igc.6.1461833867540; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 01:57:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.79.33.1 with HTTP; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 01:57:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <56E7CFF3.5010709@gmx.de> References: <56E6E454.7090207@gmx.de> <56E7CFF3.5010709@gmx.de> From: Takeshi Yoshino Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 17:57:27 +0900 Message-ID: To: Julian Reschke Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d042a0bdd659c15053187b818 Archived-At: Cc: Ted Hardie , Server-Initiated HTTP Subject: Re: [hybi] Websockets sub-protocol registry X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 08:57:50 -0000 --f46d042a0bdd659c15053187b818 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 6:03 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 2016-03-15 09:52, Takeshi Yoshino wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 1:43 AM, Ted Hardie > > wrote: >> >> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Julian Reschke >> > wrote: >> >> snip > >> FYI, current status of browsers: >> >> The implementation of the WHATWG WebSocket API on Chromium 49.0.2623.87: >> - validates that the Sec-WebSocket-Protocol header value in the >> handshake response is one of the subprotocols listed in the handshake >> request. >> - Case-sensitive comparison is used for this. >> - When the validation fails, the handshake fails. >> >> The API implemented on Firefox 44.0.2: >> - also validates the value against the list sent in the handshake request. >> - But case-insensitive comparison is used. >> > > ...raise a bug report? > > Added a comment to an existing bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=711886 Thanks --f46d042a0bdd659c15053187b818 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On T= ue, Mar 15, 2016 at 6:03 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrot= e:
On 2016-03-15 09:52, Takeshi = Yoshino wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 1:43 AM, Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com
 <mailto:ted.ietf@gmail.com>= > wrote:

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Julian Reschke
 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 <julian.reschke@g= mx.de <mailto:julian.reschk= e@gmx.de>> wrote:


snip
=C2= =A0

FYI, current status of browsers:

The implementation of the WHATWG WebSocket API on Chromium 49.0.2623.87: - validates that the Sec-WebSocket-Protocol header value in the
handshake response is one of the subprotocols listed in the handshake
request.
- Case-sensitive comparison is used for this.
- When the validation fails, the handshake fails.

The API implemented on Firefox 44.0.2:
- also validates the value against the list sent in the handshake request.<= br> - But case-insensitive comparison is used.

 ...raise a bug report?


Added a comm= ent to an existing bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D711886

Thanks
=C2=A0
--f46d042a0bdd659c15053187b818-- From nobody Thu Apr 28 06:46:19 2016 Return-Path: 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 4EAF912D781; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 06:46:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.4 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com 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 37Xw-daHN0s6; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 06:46:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ig0-x244.google.com (mail-ig0-x244.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A131212D780; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 06:46:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ig0-x244.google.com with SMTP id qu10so13038595igc.1; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 06:46:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc; bh=QkLkGuIgSgA0ywIfsjFMO/uZXzWeVHiEZiFC4T5JY1Y=; b=JaKcXPVJdti9ylDMHTJKwPVCwa4rpqlJfceljqTnbPgUkgx9LF5eRjG8YQ9u6plmWe etgWjAx7uH6Jqy8PfwNwUJ30myC8+59AEoXcZkofQYAVMNsAtpm4aUAXagx9MiJrhAPK W2FKsnDh5jj6sFqZcvCmOO8lsA9iGsWoXL1+ppLNB0tDccY5xjtTGrdgFcLV/zQI3pCJ fSPpL3hU++aUSpizW5fwb9cbNHSTvX7xeaZyr8zS8zRgSWmNizzm3DG1MxkEN9TxPFlF vhjJY6V0S46QZ9kbVtXkEmJXI1CccIP4p18Vs4ZevuqOqqMxZHgixj/uDTlZ9itB0dGS XGWg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=QkLkGuIgSgA0ywIfsjFMO/uZXzWeVHiEZiFC4T5JY1Y=; b=BqtrXvaaCoiVU5tpX1EIhyWdqRKG9S7rAzgkXoSkLXfCafFF8G0nl4AsqXreF+MQVw Xa//Jgo945zAjrgLSZA0eW4M7+uIOAx55OhJrX3SUmdC9kBaLfw8FMDxQsOpp7qJ4kJx QEj9c+5uEh4h+pfguw1A4rtf/ROOvREup6VoZy3pTIVIfnIrAHAau1MXddDGux8hF7B0 s+3hUB5T5OdcDOXTyvnDvRlY3ROwcho5Jxaj88LzoXcA4toq/wFaS50SaTXiqabtI6In 0OB2U9TXl0SVGHrb0MtD/vQO+GdnRCvjf3JFYKzKTrxNn/Zb7G2ZxPcBFoMz9H5crHgb ddgw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FU9ui//2t6qn448kofg6MfQrJ/YnSErpFwMKtcFnDqvMOl8LvZqphiqTUhsQqxF+SHiQVouB4/NXbX5cw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.29.45 with SMTP id g13mr11123198igh.93.1461851169956; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 06:46:09 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com Received: by 10.107.144.11 with HTTP; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 06:46:09 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 09:46:09 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: TnNsu9MMOyWzGf6rbuq73EkSkvg Message-ID: From: Barry Leiba To: draft-hardie-rfc6455-iana-clarification.all@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Cc: "hybi@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [hybi] Update to IANA registration procedure for websocket sub-protocol registry X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 13:46:16 -0000 > As per discussion on the mailing list, I started IETF LC on this short > document: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hardie-rfc6455-iana-clarification/ For the IANA Considerations: It would be good to ask IANA to change the registry's reference field to add this document, in addition to RFC6455, as its references. Barry From nobody Thu Apr 28 12:15:43 2016 Return-Path: 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 3CAD412D869 for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 12:15:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=adligo-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com 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 4S6MgICChOvP for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 12:15:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ig0-x230.google.com (mail-ig0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 77ED612D641 for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 12:15:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ig0-x230.google.com with SMTP id bi2so1244115igb.0 for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 12:15:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=adligo-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to; bh=8u9msNWKEIF9oOwi//+BDs3ZgWoXjOfYlfq+SX3D360=; b=Qvz60hA6I1CoeBfjxonIITCDPg7sNczPEv8yRFc3zNeTBtwUM4SU0Ha+47YpWZovWp 2EQ9m8DFVTDlAWnXw1rHcuaiCaaEDNlkxh7GKnwv5WMyZH8iVAkaCx/l8lLPRrcqf57M dC2quHrPWxMm+ogvXtkWw+kyA1GHjH1PcjUvFSTmOrreMEM46b3OLGhoUVgTVoB3hG0d x5hMyWfoKn4lNQEGUhRQiDfdThJLNoCgVRkNdjW+XSwvyyAoXCyX4Oh+Sy+wnzL8AXlq +ZG0megClbrzqvyDODfKYLr413YN9BHDIHZY9Si8LdEtrvgiok3N3J8utzLOCFiO1ofw /K/Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to; bh=8u9msNWKEIF9oOwi//+BDs3ZgWoXjOfYlfq+SX3D360=; b=HzK7sGYer2NtJ7we+dZ7aU2Nr19Uf+4OHSCRgbViz6O4v72QHM3wKl5pSvBszP1gnt XplxEyai7sPt8JhtJsG0WO5j1QXsyG6YwAxvlpk53RYdmi5Yq+bx7u6llUx2pUaBYexc cgAPBALhYN8KAtZk229zlJ4EjNbSwssbeNKQTSJVrFm0qv3BKrypSFcLP3soYC/f4oyu aC0/LNAWHq6TCyCbAlxmy76Sdz51Bn81gSFlpIbVA3lWQBt2pTUxr90QYjd4qJ6KoTrn JvIx2omLBtvlpB2rEOB4bcBs7chXz4Yph7AcTYTUi/I5nwwYBPAjMcsVv8+8l7L10ZKF HcBg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FX9rWn2f+mTVweAhTX/PG+71bePUntGS5dS7+Ts8I1AGnei1jJRlgFcFDuveVmsdiY2NNmrqyQZS8TVMA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.221.67 with SMTP id qc3mr21159383igc.77.1461870939815; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 12:15:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.79.39.80 with HTTP; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 12:15:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 14:15:39 -0500 Message-ID: From: Scott Morgan To: hybi@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11343b781362160531905a19 Archived-At: Subject: [hybi] Sub-Registry Protocols that are not exclusive to WebSockets X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 19:15:42 -0000 --001a11343b781362160531905a19 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi All, I just wanted to point out that there is not always a hierarchy between protocols. For example the protocol I am working on ASBP (Asynchronous Services Bus Protocol) is intended to be layered on top of any of; WebSockets Http/2 Http 1.1 Http 1.0 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-adligo-hybi-asbp/?include_text=1 In the ASBP case I would guess that I should register ASBP as a WebSocket sub protocol, as well as a sub protocol for all of the above protocols. On the other hand perhaps the title 'Websockets Sub-Protocol Registry' should be changed to 'Protocols Supported Over WebSockets' in order to facilitate clarity. Cheers, Scott --001a11343b781362160531905a19 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=09 =09 =09

Hi All,

I just wanted to point out that there is not always a hierarchy between protocols.=20 For example the protocol I am working on ASBP (Asynchronous Services Bus Protocol) is intended to be layered on top of any of;

WebSockets

Http/2

Http 1.1

Http 1.0

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-adligo-hybi-= asbp/?include_text=3D1


In the ASBP case I would guess that I should register ASBP as a WebSocket sub protocol, as well as a sub protocol for all of the above protocols. =20


On the other hand perhaps t= he title 'Websockets Sub-Protocol Registry' should be changed to 'Protocols Supported Over WebSocket= s' in order to facilitate clarity.


Cheers,

Scott

--001a11343b781362160531905a19--