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

On 08/10/2018 01:09 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 2018-08-10 05:48, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>> 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.
>> ...
> 
> Is it? What if the code that handles the Upgrade token is 
> protocol-agnostic? The problem here is that the IANA registry is 
> first-come-first-serve, and also doesn't have a "case-insensitive" flag.
> 
> IMHO it would be better to just fix the protocol (ws over h2) - it's not 
> even published yet after all.

The problem only exists between RFC6455 talking about case-insensitive 
receive and the registry having one case variation registered - not the 
one all the implementations I know of are using to send, "websockets". 
There're no actual problem in the field... they all send "websockets" 
but would accept case variation on what they receive.  Also registering 
"websockets" will formalize the reality everyone is sending "websockets".

The H2 thing doesn't use the same mechanism, and the CONNECT it does use 
already specifies a single literal

```
5.

The pseudo-header :protocol MUST be included in the CONNECT request and 
it MUST have a value of websocket to initiate a WebSocket connection on 
an HTTP/2 stream.
```

https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-httpbis-h2-websockets-03.html

I couldn't see anywhere that the :protocol names are "registered", but 
that's OK isn't it?

When you say, "fix the protocol (ws over h2)" what do you envisage 
getting "fixed" in that?

-Andy

BTW I am curious about implementation status of ws-over-h2 in browsers. 
I know chrome canary has been working for a while with some voodoo to 
enable it, but what about other browsers?

> Best regards, Julian
>

Received on Friday, 10 August 2018 05:24:17 UTC