Alexandre Morgaut wrote:
> IETF still shows the draft 75 as the more recent one:
>
> [1]https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hixie-thewebsocketprotocol/
>
> But sure that if the draft 76 breaks compatibility and people are
> working to implement it, it should be the one to look after...
>
> [2]http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-socket-protocol/

See below. The editor says "-75 is long dead", but he stopped sending
updates to the IETF; the relationship between them does not seem very
healthy at the moment.

Also "-75 is still the one supported by chrome (and other clients)".

>> To: "hybi_at_ietf.org" <hybi_at_ietf.org>
>> Date: Mon, 03 May 2010 09:18:43 +0200
>> Subject: [hybi] status of websockets drafts
>> From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke_at_gmx.de>
>> Message-ID: <4BDE78D3.6000502_at_gmx.de>
>>
>> Just notices:
>>
>> <http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20100503#l-206>
>>
>> ># # [09:04] <micheil> Hixie: is draft76 going to become draft76 on the ieft
>> >site?
>> ># # [09:06] * Quits: othermaciej (~mjs_at_c-69-181-42-237.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
>> >(Quit: othermaciej)
>> ># # [09:08] * Joins: mpt (~mpt_at_canonical/mpt)
>> ># # [09:13] <Hixie> micheil: the ietf asked me to stop sending them updates
>> >because they couldn't cope with the volume of updates, so no idea
>> ># # [09:13] <Hixie> as far as i'm concerned, -75 is long dead
>> ># # [09:13] <micheil> oh, righteo
>> ># # [09:13] <Hixie> if i'd still been sending updates, -76 would actually
>> >be like -90 or so by now
>> ># # [09:13] <micheil> yeah, -75 is still the one supported by chrome (and
>> >other clients), so it's the one I must have work
>>
>> After all, there might be a compromise between "too many" and "too little".

> There is a description of future support for binary frames
> A length is then specified before each frame (really looks like HTTP
> chunk)

There's been a lot of discussion recently about whether it should be
more like a HTTP chunk (many chunks = one message, reassembly
performed by WebSocket implementations and intermediary), or whole
message only (no splitting/reassembly, causes some protocol problems
with graceful close / graceful errors).

Imho, very hard to see where it'll end up.

The WebSocket draft editor, Ian Hixie, recently said binary frames
should not be used by current applications. All frame type numbers
that aren't used at the moment are reserved for future revisions of
WebSocket itself. Applications are not meant to pick and choose frame
type numbers.

However some implementations are already ignoring the editor's advice.
It's a bit of a messy situation.

On the bright side, all other WebSocket implementations are in the
same situation :-)

-- Jamie
-------------------------------------------------------------------
List admin: http://cool.haxx.se/list/listinfo/curl-library
Etiquette: http://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html
Received on 2010-05-04