Add WebSocket :protocol extension per RFC 9220. #236
+5
−0
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Hi. you can add some unit test. |
|
What should the unit test test? |
|
Other implementation of RFC9220: |
It is appropriate to add a heavy dev-dependency for a such a trivial change? |
|
Based on what I see on other implementations of websocket, h3 should only provide the minimum at http level to be able to establish websockets connection, which is, in short, the ability to set CONNECT pseudo-headers, and maybe send the settings frames, besides that, looks like the remaining parts can still take advantage of existing frame parsing libraries. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Attempt to add WebSocket support to h3.
I don't know any server that supports RFC 9220, so it is untested.