- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 09:55:24 +1000
- To: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
- Cc: Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>, "Julian F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Saying that it's an "alias" implies that the values are interchangeable, which seems like an interop issue given the current specs. IANA and the RFC editor are asking for exact text for the registry values; what should we write? Cheers, > On 15 Aug 2018, at 7:01 pm, Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> wrote: > > > On 9 Aug 2018, at 22:31, Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com> wrote: > >> 6455 also uses lower case "websocket" when sending (and it mandates case insensitive parsing when receiving) even though the registry apparently has "Websocket" defined. >> >> I'd prefer to just register websocket as an alias. in my experience that's the normal usage. > > Agreed. > >> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 1:16 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: >> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-h2-websockets-07#section-4>: >> >> o A new pseudo-header field :protocol MAY be included on request >> HEADERS indicating the desired protocol to be spoken on the tunnel >> created by CONNECT. The pseudo-header field is single valued and >> contains a value from the HTTP Upgrade Token Registry located at >> https://www.iana.org/assignments/http-upgrade-tokens/http-upgrade- >> tokens.xhtml >> >> And in <https://www.iana.org/assignments/http-upgrade-tokens/http-upgrade-tokens.xhtml>: >> >> WebSocket The Web Socket Protocol [RFC6455] >> >> But, later on in <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-h2-websockets-07#section-5> and subsequent examples: >> >> The :protocol pseudo-header field 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. Other HTTP request and >> response header fields, such as those for manipulating cookies, may >> be included in the HEADERS with the CONNECT method as usual. This >> request replaces the GET-based request in [RFC6455] and is used to >> process the WebSockets opening handshake. >> >> Note that the registered upgrade token is "WebSocket", but the spec requires the use of "websocket". >> >> See also <https://github.com/httpwg/http-core/issues/8>. >> >> Recommendation, in order of preference: >> >> 1) Fix the spec to use "WebSocket" consistently. >> >> 2) Register "websocket" as alias. >> >> It would probably be good to also clarify that value matching for ":protocol" is consistent with "Upgrade" in HTTP/1.1, meaning case-sensitive. >> >> Best regards, Julian >> >> -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/
Received on Monday, 27 August 2018 23:55:52 UTC