[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [hybi] WS framing alternative

From: Sylvain Hellegouarch <sh at defuze.org>
To: Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch>
Cc: hybi at ietf.org
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2009 23:16:20 +0100
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0910310401280.25616 at hixie.dreamhostps.com>
References: <mailman.3820.1256908248.4669.hybi at ietf.org> <91a5e3ea0910301458q465e5778kb46bcaedc65595a6 at mail.gmail.com> <4AEB7AD1.7050509 at webtide.com> <Pine.LNX.4.62.0910310401280.25616 at hixie.dreamhostps.com>

On Fri, 30 Oct 2009, Jason Duell wrote:
From my reading of the last few days' posts, it does seem like focusingon use cases might be the best way to move the conversation forward.The more concrete the use cases, the better.
Agreed.


Well this was the idea already many months ago if I recall correctly :)

I guess concrete use cases are just the various protocols you mentionedalready: IMAP, XMPP, FTP,etc. Those are not only concrete but wellspecified and implemented. Was there real interests to actually mockthem up using a WebSocket transport so far?


- Sylvain

References:
- Re: [hybi] hybi Digest, Vol 8, Issue 41
  - From: Jason Duell
- Re: [hybi] hybi Digest, Vol 8, Issue 41
  - From: Greg Wilkins
- Re: [hybi] WS framing alternative
  - From: Ian Hickson

Prev by Date: Re: [hybi] web socket protocol in "last call"?
Next by Date: Re: [hybi] WS framing alternative
Previous by thread: Re: [hybi] WS framing alternative
Next by thread: Re: [hybi] WS framing alternative
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.