W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2014

Re: WebSocket over HTTP/2.0

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2014 10:39:48 +1100
Cc: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, Yutaka Hirano <yhirano@google.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <0FF57A70-82D8-4C15-B2DE-FD7394FEDBF0@mnot.net>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
I've created an issue to track this, since we haven't done so explicitly before:

I'd like to have a *brief* discussion about it in London, so that we can come to agreement about what the plan is going forward.


On 15 Feb 2014, at 8:49 am, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 14 February 2014 12:25, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I am completely uninterested in any option that keeps full RFC6455 semantics
>> (frame extensions make zero sense) without significant ofsetting benefits,
>> and I would work to ensure such was not again created at IETF, and would
>> work to ensure that it was not implemented at Google.
> I too wondered why there was a need to tunnel thewebsocketprotocol as
> opposed to creating a way to map the semantics efficiently.

Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Saturday, 15 February 2014 23:40:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:24 UTC