> -----Original Message----- > From: Standards [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Peter > Saint-Andre - &yet > Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 12:15 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Standards] draft-ietf-xmpp-websocket-10 > > On 10/8/14, 11:04 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > Section 3.2 of draft-ietf-xmpp-websocket-xx specifies that data frames > > must be of type text and contain UTF-8 encoded data. Was there some > > reason for this since it makes XMPP stream compression not usable? > > Hi Dave, > > I think we'd recommend doing compression at the HTTP layer, just as for > WebSocket we're doing security at the HTTP layer. > > Also, the spec has been approved for publication and is in the RFC Editor queue > so it's too late to change it: > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xmpp-websocket/ > > And [email protected] is the right list for IETF specs. :-) > > Peter > > -- > Peter Saint-Andre > https://andyet.com/
Thanks - it would have been helpful to put in some statement to that effect. What was the intent? The websocket is not HTTP so the HTTP CONTENT-ENCODING should not apply to the websocket. The next option would be the websocket extension mechanism but although RFC 6455 alludes to compression, there is no compression extension (or any other type) listed in the registry. Seems there isn't really a current option for compression or am I missing something?
