- From: Momoka Yamamoto <momoka.my6@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2023 14:19:48 +0900
- To: Ilari Liusvaara <ilariliusvaara@welho.com>
- Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAD9w2qYgBCS74U5PJXY8SXK27hEa7B8hPyuVmMEOz6UZsYHgoA@mail.gmail.com>
Thank you, Ilari I've updated the draft to reflect your comments. draft: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-momoka-httpbis-settings-enable-websockets/ diff: https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url1=draft-momoka-httpbis-settings-enable-websockets-01&url2=draft-momoka-httpbis-settings-enable-websockets-02&difftype=--html Momoka Y momoka.my6@gmail.com On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 2:18 PM Momoka Yamamoto <momoka.my6@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Ilari, > > - Does setting SETTINGS_ENABLE_WEBSOCKETS=1 imply support for necressary >> parts of extended connect, or does server also need to send >> SETTINGS_ENABLE_CONNECT_PROTOCOL=1? > > The server also needs to send SETTINGS_ENABLE_CONNECT_PROTOCOL=1. > (although SETTINGS_ENABLE_WEBSOCKETS=1 imply support for extended connect) > This is following the discussion in WebTransport wg at IETF115 [1] and the > Editor's Copy of the draft WebTransport over HTTP/3 [2] > > > > - I don't think the default for SETTINGS_ENABLE_WEBSOCKETS should be 0, >> as I think absence of SETTINGS_ENABLE_WEBSOCKETS is different from >> SETTINGS_ENABLE_WEBSOCKETS=0. Later signals that websockets is not >> supported, the former together with SETTINGS_ENABLE_CONNECT_PROTOCOL=1 >> signals that websockets may be supported (as there are currently >> servers that support websockets and behave that way). > > This makes sense. Thank you. > So you are saying there should be no default value, > as the absence of the SETTINGS parameter has it's own meaning. > > Thank you, > Momoka > > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-115-webtrans-202211101300/ > [2] > https://ietf-wg-webtrans.github.io/draft-ietf-webtrans-http3/draft-ietf-webtrans-http3.html#name-extended-connect-in-http-3 > > > > On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 3:31 AM Ilari Liusvaara <ilariliusvaara@welho.com> > wrote: > >> On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 04:12:21PM +0800, Momoka Yamamoto wrote: >> > Hello, >> > I have submitted a new revision of this >> > draft draft-momoka-httpbis-settings-enable-websockets. >> > >> > >> > The proposed parameter will be useful if an active HTTP/2 (or HTTP/3) >> > connection to the server already exists when a document with a wss:/ >> URL is >> > loaded. The browser can then choose whether to try opening the WebSocket >> > stream over the connection, as the proposed SETTINGS_ENABLE_WEBSOCKETS >> has >> > likely been received by that point. >> > >> > However, the proposed parameter won't be useful when a browser tries to >> > establish a new connection because the SETTINGS will not be received >> when a >> > decision to use HTTP/2 or HTTP/1 is made. >> >> Some comments: >> >> - Does setting SETTINGS_ENABLE_WEBSOCKETS=1 imply support for necressary >> parts of extended connect, or does server also need to send >> SETTINGS_ENABLE_CONNECT_PROTOCOL=1? >> >> - I don't think the default for SETTINGS_ENABLE_WEBSOCKETS should be 0, >> as I think absence of SETTINGS_ENABLE_WEBSOCKETS is different from >> SETTINGS_ENABLE_WEBSOCKETS=0. Later signals that websockets is not >> supported, the former together with SETTINGS_ENABLE_CONNECT_PROTOCOL=1 >> signals that websockets may be supported (as there are currently >> servers that support websockets and behave that way). >> >> >> >> -Ilari >> >>
Received on Thursday, 30 March 2023 05:20:13 UTC