W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2010

Re: [hybi] workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade

From: Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 19:27:39 +0100
Message-ID: <AANLkTimydOwRiVkrZn0zmxmvWP_V6yAmNbipOF73NBWD@mail.gmail.com>
To: Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>
Cc: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, "William A. Rowe Jr." <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>, Hybi HTTP <hybi@ietf.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 1 December 2010 19:01, Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com> wrote:
> That seems like a matter of perspective.  When opening a connection to
> a WebSocket server, can one not view the server as a proxy sever?

If Websocket was allocated it's own dedicated port (say 6543 for example),
then opening a connection to some.host.com:80 and sending

  CONNECT some.host.com:6543 HTTP/1.1

would definitely be like a proxy server (and it could even be
implemented that way, although I expect many servers would optimise
out the trombone).

But I'm not sure that

 CONNECT some.special.token HTTP/1.1

could be consider a proxy or in the spirit of the HTTP spec.

Received on Wednesday, 1 December 2010 18:28:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:55 UTC