Re: WebSockets negotiation over HTTP

On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>
> Section 5.2 does constrain the bytes the server accepts from the client,
> thereby conflicting with HTTP, but only in some small details. In
> particular, it makes HTTP header field-names case-sensitive, and
> requires certain arrangements of whitespace in them.
>
> Ian, if you can address these small things in section 5.2 it would help.

If a WebSocket client is connecting to a WebSocket server, then this isn't
HTTP, it's just the WebSocket protocol. So whether the fields are parsed
like HTTP is presumably not a problem.

If an HTTP client is connecting to a WebSocket server, then the server's
response is going to be garbage (from the HTTP client's perspective)
anyway, much like if an HTTP client were to connect to an SMTP server. So
how the server parses the fields doesn't really matter.

If a WebSocket client is connecting to a WebSocket server, then the
requirements in this section don't apply to the server.

If an HTTP client is connecting to an HTTP server, then the whole spec
doesn't apply.

Which case is the one you are concerned about? Are my conclusions above
incorrect?

> The other aspect here is that you're really not using Upgrade in an
> appropriate fashion; as mentioned before, its intended use is to upgrade
> *this* TCP connection, not redirect to another one.

There's only one TCP connection established. As far as I can tell,
WebSocket never does a redirect of any kind.

> * Ian, are you just trying to exceed 100 drafts, thereby crashing the
> IETF? :)

No, just following the "release early release often" policy. 48 is
nothing; HTML5 itself is currently at release 4153. I've had more than 48
releases of HTML5 in the last four days.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'