W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > August 2009

Re: Discussion on URI mailing list of possible new URI schemes for Web Sockets

From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 22:27:02 -0700
Message-ID: <29af5e2d0908202227m51469f4ctbf3e79d0779d4b1e@mail.gmail.com>
To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
Cc: www-tag@w3.org, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Mark Nottingham <mark.nottingham@bea.com>
What's the point of this new protocol? To bum a small constant in
network performance? Seems shortsighted given the enormous amount of
effort it takes to tool up for and specify a new protocol. Not to
mention one that looks to essentially end a platform on which to build
a further babel of ad hoc protocols. And considering Moores law.

Definitely worth a review, if you ask me. URN versus URI seems the
least issue here.

-Alan
Alan


On Thursday, August 20, 2009,  <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> An interesting discussion is being held on the W3C URI mailing list,
> beginning with Ian Hickson's announcement that [1]:
>
>         "The formal registrations for the ws: and wss:
>         schemes, part of the Web Socket protocol,
>         will be available in the Web Socket protocol ID
>         as soon as the IETF upload process completes: [2]
>         [I'm not sure why the link is to section-7, but that's
>         the link in Ian's note -- Noah]"
>
> Not surprisingly, one question is whether an http scheme URI would be more
> appropriate.  FWIW, I'm not convinced it would be better, in this case,
> but it's an interesting discussion, and there are IMO some advantages to
> either choice.  Please also look at the associated protocol [3], which
> begins with a handshake that does use (or if you prefer, is comptible
> with) the HTTP protocol upgrade handshake.
>
> The automatic threading by the W3C mail handler isn't collecting all of
> the discussion into one thread, so it's probably worth looking through all
> of the August archives [3] if you haven't been subscribing and want to
> reconstruct the discussion.
>
> I'm not ready to suggest that the TAG undertake a formal study of this
> issue or that we provide a formal opinion on the registration, but I think
> it's at least worth taking a look at the email thread.  I will put this on
> the agenda for our 27 August teleconference.  Thank you.
>
> Noah
>
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2009Aug/0002.html
> [2] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hixie-thewebsocketprotocol#section-7
> [3] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hixie-thewebsocketprotocol
> [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2009Aug/0002.html
>
> --------------------------------------
> Noah Mendelsohn
> IBM Corporation
> One Rogers Street
> Cambridge, MA 02142
> 1-617-693-4036
> --------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 21 August 2009 05:34:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:15 GMT