Re: WebSocket over HTTP2 RFC6455 conformance

On 19 February 2014 06:11, Yutaka Hirano <yhirano@google.com> wrote:
> At hybi, the following people answered "yes & yes".

When you ask about semantics, you need to be more precise.

My interpretation of "Websocket semantics" is the set of things that
you can do with thewebsocketprotocol, or maybe the W3C WebSocket API.
If your intent is to tunnel the protocol in a completely lossless
fashion, then you are asking for more than just a preservation of
semantics, you also want to preserve syntax.

Note that we preserve syntax in HTTP/2 because there is a wealth of
usage out there that relies on syntax, and even if we might think it
unwise to do so, we are still unwilling to break those users.  It
might be that the hybi group has people using those reserved bits such
that preserving them is paramount, but websockets has far less history
than HTTP.  I also didn't find the framing of the question or the
responses to be particularly convincing.

Received on Wednesday, 19 February 2014 21:00:25 UTC