On Wed, 15 Jul 2009, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>
> I think the fundamental mistake being made here by Ian (and potentially
> others) is breaking the assumption that specific protocols exist on the
> well-known ports. Suddenly treating stuff on port 80 as "almost but not
> quite HTTP" is bound to cause issues, both devices speaking valid HTTP
> (eg Squid) and firewalls etc which may treat the exchange as "not HTTP"
> and decide to start dropping things. Or worse - passing it through,
> "sort of".
WebSocket really is its own protocol with its own ports. The talk about
port 80 is only because in some environments, those other ports aren't
going to work, and so there is interest in tunneling over ports 80 and
443, and this means sharing with HTTP servers, hence the Upgrade dance.
-- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'Received on Wed Jul 15 2009 - 22:59:09 MDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu Jul 16 2009 - 12:00:05 MDT