W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2018

Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-httpbis-h2-websockets-06: (with COMMENT)

From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 07:55:31 -0700
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: httpbis-chairs@ietf.org, mnot@mnot.net, draft-ietf-httpbis-h2-websockets@ietf.org, ietf-http-wg@w3.org, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Message-ID: <152829693185.6240.15691240901102465461.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Eric Rescorla has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-httpbis-h2-websockets-06: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpbis-h2-websockets/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Rich version of this review at:
https://mozphab-ietf.devsvcdev.mozaws.net/D5180



COMMENTS
S 4.
>         indicating the desired protocol to be spoken on the tunnel created
>         by CONNECT.  The pseudo-header is single valued and contains a
>         value from the HTTP Upgrade Token Registry defined by [RFC7230].
>   
>      o  On requests bearing the :protocol pseudo-header, the :scheme and
>         :path pseudo-header fields MUST be included.

You should say what the path means.


S 4.
>   
>      o  On requests bearing the :protocol pseudo-header, the :authority
>         pseudo-header field is interpreted according to Section 8.1.2.3 of
>         [RFC7540] instead of Section 8.3 of [RFC7540].  In particular the
>         server MUST NOT make a new TCP connection to the host and port
>         indicated by the :authority.

I was sort of able to make sense of this, but it's kind of confusing.
Perhaps you could say a word about it.




S 5.
>      the GET-based request in [RFC6455] and is used to process the
>      WebSockets opening handshake.
>   
>      The scheme of the Target URI [RFC7230] MUST be "https" for "wss"
>      schemed WebSockets and "http" for "ws" schemed WebSockets.  The
>      websocket URI is still used for proxy autoconfiguration.

Just to be clear, you are saying ":scheme" must be https or http?
Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2018 14:55:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:15:21 UTC