- From: Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>
- Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 15:25:39 -0400
- CC: public-fedsocweb@w3.org
Martin Atkins wrote: > On 09/17/2012 11:38 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote: >> Martin Atkins wrote: >>> On 09/17/2012 07:07 AM, Evan Prodromou wrote: >>>> Has anyone else looked into using Websockets for server-to-server >>>> distribution of activities? >>>> >>>> Seems like it could be very efficient. >>>> >>> >>> I'm curious to hear what advantages you consider Websockets to have >>> over tranditional sockets. Aside from the explicit message framing, is >>> there any functional difference beyond a bare TCP socket? >> >> Ummm... how would you open a raw TCP socket from JavaScript? (I'd really >> like to be able to, and the original websocket spec allowed it, but that >> functionality went away somewhere down the line.) >> > > This discussion is about server-to-server communication, so opening a > TCP socket shouldn't be a problem regardless of implementation language. Ooops.. my bad, must not have had enough coffee this morning. Re. your question: I'd comment that there are an awful lot of protocols that run on top of TCP - each optimized to a different activity. So, when the OP asks "Has anyone else looked into using Websockets for server-to-server distribution of activities?" My reaction would be "what kind of activities?" and "how does websockets compare to mature protocols used for those functions?". Miles Fidelman -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
Received on Monday, 17 September 2012 19:26:03 UTC