On Wed, Oct 20, 2021, 12:54 PM Lucas Pardue <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 5:35 PM Ben Schwartz <bemasc@google.com> wrote: > >> >> My expectation is that the supported :protocols are handled like the >> supported paths: the client knows which one it needs from the URI (e.g. >> wss://..., https://.../foo), and the origin had better support it if it >> is advertising those URIs anywhere. I don't think we need a pre-connection >> hint about the supported :protocols. >> > > I don't follow. That implies the server would present different pages to a > client based on the protocol that the client connected with. > No, I'm trying to say the opposite of that. These things are properties of the origin, not any specific endpoint or transport. ... > If it does, and finds that the server doesn't support the protocol that it > wants, then the request will fail, and the client wasted its time. > Sure. That's just like a 404, and the solution is the same: don't tell your users to send requests that your origin doesn't support.
Received on Wednesday, 20 October 2021 17:27:57 UTC