Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-httpbis-h2-websockets-07

Request Review of draft-ietf-httpbis-h2-websockets
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 07)
Type Last Call Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2018-05-21
Requested 2018-05-07
Authors Patrick McManus
I-D last updated 2018-07-02
Completed reviews Secdir Last Call review of -05 by Carl Wallace (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -07 by Victor Kuarsingh
Assignment Reviewer Victor Kuarsingh
State Completed
Review review-ietf-httpbis-h2-websockets-07-opsdir-lc-kuarsingh-2018-07-02
Reviewed revision 07
Result Ready
Completed 2018-07-02
Reviewer: Victor Kuarsingh
Review result: Ready

Dear Authors,

I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational directorate's ongoing
effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG.  These
comments were written with the intent of improving the operational aspects of
the IETF drafts. Comments that are not addressed in last call may be included
in AD reviews  during the IESG review.  Document editors and WG chairs should
treat these comments just like any other last call comments.

Document Reviewed - Bootstrapping WebSockets with HTTP/2
Link to Document

Status: Ready for publication


This document creates a mechanism to establish Websockets (RFC 6455) utilizing
an HTTP/2 connection

The document would update RFC 6455 if approved to add similar resultant
functionality to HTTP/2 based connections as one would get with HTTP1.1 per
RFC7230 (Section 6.7) - upgrade header functionality.

I reviewed Version 07 of the document since it was published before I was able
to conduct my review.

General Comments and Feedback:

The document appears ready for publication.  The major two areas for
operational review were captured in section 7 (Intermediaries / proxies) and
section 8 (security considerations).

The only potential additional consideration one may have wanted to add would be
related to proxies which may not be able process the new/extended CONNECT
functionality.  It’s possible additional failures modes may be possible for
existing deployments.

No editorial changes suggested


Victor Kuarsingh