Re: Issue with draft-ietf-httpbis-h2-websockets-07 (in RFC Editor queue)

On 10/08/18 11:25, Mike Bishop wrote:
> Ick.  This looks like a 6455 erratum – the registration is “WebSocket”
> but all the (non-normative) examples are “websocket”.  Case-insensitive
> matching is explicitly permitted, and RFC2616/2817 don’t clearly say
> that Upgrade tokens are or aren’t case-sensitive that I can find.  (Nor
> do I see it in 7230…?)
> 

I was of the understanding that Upgrade labels are governed by the
relevant protocols equivalent of RFC 7230 section 2.6 rules. So for
example HTTP labels *are* case sensitive, but WebSockets is free to
define sensitivity for its own label.

RFC 6455 defines with a MUST requirement that client send "websocket"
(lower case) in Upgrade headers. Also there is a MUST requiring
case-insensitive match for non-"websocket" to fail the connection
(implying case-sensitive "websocket" is valid).

The situation seems reasonably clear to me that WebSockets Upgrade
values are case-insensitive.

Amos

Received on Friday, 10 August 2018 03:49:06 UTC