On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 09:59 +1100, Mark Nottingham wrote: > On 13/10/2009, at 10:23 PM, "Ian Hickson" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I want to just use port 80, and I want to make it possible for a > > suitably > > configured HTTP server to pass connections over to WebSocket > > servers. It > > seems to me that using something that looks like an HTTP Upgrade is > > better > > than just having a totally unrelated handshake, but I guess maybe we > > should just reuse port 80 without doing anything HTTP-like at all. > > To be clear, upgrade is appropriate for changing an existing > connection over to a new protocol (ie reusing it). To pass a request > over to a different server, a redirect would be more appropriate (and > is facilitated by the new uri scheme).
Yup; and the major issue here is that websockets *does not want* the initial handshake to be HTTP. Rather it wants to be something not-quite HTTP, specifically reject a number of behaviours and headers that are legitimate HTTP. -Rob
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
