ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [hybi] Last Call: <draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-10.txt> (The WebSocket protocol) to Proposed Standard

2011-07-27 11:07:03
2011/7/27 Willy Tarreau <w(_at_)1wt(_dot_)eu>:
I don't think home users (neither professional users) has nothing to
decide here, they will not "resolve" the WS URI retrieved from a
webpage.

I think you're wrong. Those are these users which ask for feature XXX or
YYY that they like because it brings them a better experience. If you can
find a real benefit for the end user, there will be an option in the browser
and some of them will enable it. It's just important to find how an end user
may benefit from making use of SRV tags when connecting to his favorite site
instead of using just CNAME or A/AAAA. Maybe being able to always connect to
less loaded servers would be appreciated, because some site maintainers will
start announcing new servers. Maybe there are solutions to provide better
geolocation using SRV than with A (ie: let the web browser decide which field
to use instead of relying on its resolver's IP address). Maybe it will be
possible for mobile users to automatically select a different port which is
not subject to annoying transparent proxies at their provider. I don't know.
You must think in terms of better experience which might be brought via
better quality of service. Surely a DNS record might provide information to
improve QoS based on the browser's decision.

So we are talking about webbrowser vendors, right? and typically there
are no more than.... 10?

Browsers implement what their users ask for. They don't want to add features
that are not desired and make experience worse or reduce reliability. But if
users ask for something, they'll certainly implement it.


Well, I understand (and agree) most of your text, but I still think
that the URI resolution mechanism is something transparent for an
end-user. This is not like having FlashPlayer for showing annoying and
dancing menus in a web page XD. End-users ask for FlashPlayer (and
Android 2.3 has included it for example) but end-users won't ask for
"SRV procedures".

I would translate your arguments to "web developers", those who want
to provide scalable systems and for which having some kind of QoS
mechanisms (specially for mobile devices) is a great advantage. Of
course, if this happens then end-users would be happier :)

-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc(_at_)aliax(_dot_)net>
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>