[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml|html] [Tracker] [Email] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02 03

Network Working Group                                         T. Yoshino
Internet-Draft                                                    W. Zhu
Intended status: Standards Track                            Google, Inc.
Expires: April 22, 2017                                 October 19, 2016


 WiSH: A General Purpose Message Framing over Byte-Stream Oriented Wire
                            Protocols (HTTP)
                         draft-yoshino-wish-00

Abstract

   This document defines a general purpose message framing named WiSH
   which supports bi-directional message-based communication over byte-
   stream oriented protocols such as HTTP (in its standard semantics).
   The WiSH framing is designed to be compatible with WebSocket.  You
   may want to think about WiSH as a binary and bi-directional
   alternative to the framing defined for the server-sent events [SSE].

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on April 22, 2017.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of



Yoshino & Zhu            Expires April 22, 2017                 [Page 1]


Internet-DrafWiSH: A General Purpose Message Framing over B October 2016


   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Background  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Conformance Requirements and Terminology  . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  WiSH Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   5.  Framing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     7.2.  Non-normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6

1.  Introduction

   The WebSocket protocol was proposed to provide native client-server
   bi-directional messaging for the Web.  It has been implemented and
   deployed widely, but there are still missing semantics and
   functionalities.  See [BidiwebSurvey].

   WiSH is a message framing format for use over the standard HTTP
   semantics to provide bi-directional messaging semantics.  WiSH stands
   for Web in Strict HTTP.  The communication protocol providing the
   HTTP semantics can be HTTP/1.1 [RFC7231], HTTP/2 [RFC7540], HTTP/2 +
   QUIC [QUIC], or any future protocols.  Wire-protocol functionalities
   such as compression, multiplexing, session priority, etc. are
   provided by the underlying protocol [TransportAbstraction].  Unlike
   HTTP/2, HTTP/1.1 doesn't specify if earlier 2xx responses are allowed
   [RFC7540].  Therefore when HTTP/1.1 is used as the underlying
   protocol, full-duplex communication may be broken if the client,
   server or any proxy chooses to buffer or reject earlier 2xx
   responses.  Since proxies may buffer response bodies, communication
   over WiSH may experience extra latency compared to WebSocket.  When
   HTTPS is used, response buffering by proxies is less likely to
   happen.

   Wire-protocol features of WebSocket, such as handshake or control
   messages, are all dropped.  The WiSH framing respects the semantics
   of the underlying protocol (as opposed to turning it to a transport
   protocol).  The concept of fragmentation is retained for enabling
   starting message transmission before determining the final length of
   the message.






Yoshino & Zhu            Expires April 22, 2017                 [Page 2]


Internet-DrafWiSH: A General Purpose Message Framing over B October 2016


   Application-level protocols may use WiSH as the framing protocol to
   support bi-directional communication over HTTP and for Web and
   Internet clients.

2.  Background

   There has been several attempts to improve bi-directional message-
   based communication on the Web.

   The server-sent events [SSE] realized message-based communication in
   the server-to-client direction, by introducing a new Web API and a
   special message framing format while using HTTP as the wire protocol.
   Except for the issue of possible buffering by intermediaries, the
   server-sent events work well with existing intermediaries and
   frameworks that support HTTP.

   WebSocket introduced both a new Web API and a new wire protocol to
   realize bi-directional message-based communication.  Because the wire
   protocol is incompatible with HTTP, intermediaries and frameworks
   have to be upgraded to understand the protocol to support WebSocket.

   In parallel to the development of WebSocket, HTTP has been greatly
   improved with HTTP/2.  There are more improvements upcoming e.g.
   QUIC to the HTTP.  At the same time, the Web APIs for HTTP have also
   been improved.  The XMLHttpRequest is being replaced with the Fetch
   API [Fetch] which allows for streamed uploading and downloading of
   the body part of HTTP messages by using the Streams API [Streams].
   The Streams API also enables implementing data transfer and various
   data processing (e.g. compression/decompression, message framing) in
   the form of the transform stream.  The transform stream mechanism is
   designed to allow for optimizing transfer and processing by
   offloading some part of them from the JavaScript world.

   It's desirable that furthur evolution of bi-directional message-based
   communication utilize HTTP/2 to reduce cost of development and
   standardization.  Bidi communication should be multiplexed with
   normal HTTP traffic and should benefit from future transport-level
   improvements such as QUIC.

   The WiSH idea is based on the above analysis.  Combination of the
   Fetch API and transform streams enables efficient processing of the
   WiSH framing.  Use of the HTTP semantics as-is reduces cost and makes
   the Web simpler.  Once the WiSH idea is successfully adopted, binding
   to the WebSocket API could be introduced as furthur optimization for
   existing WebSocket users.






Yoshino & Zhu            Expires April 22, 2017                 [Page 3]


Internet-DrafWiSH: A General Purpose Message Framing over B October 2016


3.  Conformance Requirements and Terminology

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].

   Requirements phrased in the imperative as part of algorithms (such as
   "strip any leading space characters" or "return false and abort these
   steps") are to be interpreted with the meaning of the key word
   ("MUST", "SHOULD", "MAY", etc.) used in introducing the algorithm.

   Conformance requirements phrased as algorithms or specific steps can
   be implemented in any manner, so long as the end result is
   equivalent.  In particular, the algorithms defined in this
   specification are intended to be easy to understand and are not
   intended to be performant.

4.  WiSH Protocol

   WiSH frames messages over an HTTP request or response body using the
   framing defined in Section 5.

   The Content-Type header value of the underlying HTTP request/response
   message MUST be "application/webstream".

5.  Framing

    0                   1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-------+-+-------------+-------------------------------+
   |F|0|0|0|opcode |0|Payload      |Extended payload length        |
   |I| | | |4 bit  | |length       |16 bit if payload length is 126|
   |N| | | |       | |7 bit        |64 bit if payload length is 127|
   +-+-+-+-+-------+-+-------------+ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - +
   |                                                               |
   + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - +-------------------------------+
   |                               |Payload Data                   |
   +-------------------------------+ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - +
   |                                                               |
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+

   WiSH framing is compatible with the framing defined in [RFC6455] for
   the WebSocket protocol.

   The opcode field indicates how to interpret the payload data field.
   WiSH uses the following opcodes.

   o  %x0 denotes a continuation frame



Yoshino & Zhu            Expires April 22, 2017                 [Page 4]


Internet-DrafWiSH: A General Purpose Message Framing over B October 2016


   o  %x1 denotes a text frame

   o  %x2 denotes a binary frame

   Any values not listed here are reserved.

   The FIN bit together with the continuation frame opcode, payload
   length and extended payload length work in the same way as WebSocket
   to represent frames and messages.  The fragmentation mechanism allows
   for flushing part of a large message payload without waiting for the
   total size of the message to be determined.

   The message type distinction by the opcode field (text and binary) is
   kept to allow better Web support.  One of the possible use cases is
   to use the text type for exchaning meta data encoded in JSON, etc.,
   and the binary type for exchanging non-meta data messages.

   The status code and status reason defined in the WebSocket protocol
   are dropped.

   The ping and pong control message of the WebSocket protocol are
   dropped.  If such a feature is needed, it should be provided by
   underlying protocols.

   The permessage-deflate extension [RFC7692] is defined for the
   WebSocket protocol, to add a compression mechanism to it.  No
   extension mechanism is defined for WiSH.  Compression can be
   implemented by underlying protocols or in the application layer if
   needed.  What contents are exchanged and in what encoding they are
   exchanged over WiSH are to be defined by the application layer.

6.  Acknowledgements

   Thank you to the following people for giving feedback to the
   document: Ben Christensen, Kari Hurtta, Roberto Peon.

7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC6455]  Fette, I. and A. Melnikov, "The WebSocket Protocol",
              RFC 6455, DOI 10.17487/RFC6455, December 2011,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6455>.



Yoshino & Zhu            Expires April 22, 2017                 [Page 5]


Internet-DrafWiSH: A General Purpose Message Framing over B October 2016


   [RFC7231]  Fielding, R., Ed. and J. Reschke, Ed., "Hypertext Transfer
              Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content", RFC 7231,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7231, June 2014,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7231>.

   [RFC7540]  Belshe, M., Peon, R., and M. Thomson, Ed., "Hypertext
              Transfer Protocol Version 2 (HTTP/2)", RFC 7540,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7540, May 2015,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7540>.

   [RFC7692]  Yoshino, T., "Compression Extensions for WebSocket",
              RFC 7692, DOI 10.17487/RFC7692, December 2015,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7692>.

7.2.  Non-normative References

   [SSE]      WHATWG, "HTML Living Standard", October 2016,
              <https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/comms.html>.

   [Fetch]    WHATWG, "Fetch Standard", October 2016,
              <https://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/>.

   [Streams]  WHATWG, "Standard", October 2016,
              <https://streams.spec.whatwg.org/>.

   [BidiwebSurvey]
              Yoshino, T. and W. Zhu, "Non Request-Response
              Communication over the Web, and What's Missing", January
              2014, <https://github.com/bidiweb/bidiweb-
              semantics/blob/master/SurveyOfProtocolGaps.md>.

   [TransportAbstraction]
              Zhu, W., "http-transport-abstraction", July 2016,
              <https://github.com/bidiweb/http-transport-abstraction>.

   [QUIC]     Hamilton, R., Iyengar, J., Swett, I., and A. Wilk, "QUIC:
              A UDP-Based Secure and Reliable Transport for HTTP/2",
              July 2016.

Authors' Addresses

   Takeshi Yoshino
   Google, Inc.

   Email: tyoshino@google.com






Yoshino & Zhu            Expires April 22, 2017                 [Page 6]


Internet-DrafWiSH: A General Purpose Message Framing over B October 2016


   Wenbo Zhu
   Google, Inc.

   Email: wenboz@google.com















































Yoshino & Zhu            Expires April 22, 2017                 [Page 7]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129c, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/