Greg Wilkins wrote:I don't think that's true. As far as I remember, Ian hasn't disagreed
> And I shouldn't have said Ian is not listening. my apologies.
>
> He is listening. He's just not agreeing that it's a problem for
> some HTTP developers to add extra constraints to the upgrade
> response.
with that, only argued that it isn't sufficient reason to change the spec.
Remember, what makes life easier for those piggybacking on HTTP
implementations also makes life *harder* for those writing WebSocket
clients and servers from scratch.
However I do basically think the right balance has not been struck,
and that HTTP-compatible (or HTTP-similar) header flexibility will
benefit WebSocket-only agents in the long run too.
HTTP parsing isn't a tenth as complex as it looks in the HTTP spec,
and most HTTP rules don't need to be followed in this situation. Even
most headers can be ignored. Nobody would care if continuation lines
were rejected as bad syntax.
-- Jamie
_______________________________________________
hybi mailing list
hybi at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.