Re: [hybi] Comments about draft-13

Also, to re-iterate a comment I made earlier, "Sec-Websocket-Protocol" should just be "Websocket-Protocol", since it is not "Sec" -- scripts can set the value pretty much directly.

--Richard 

On Sep 6, 2011, at 8:28 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:

> 2011/9/2 Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>:
>> 3) Section 4.2.2 does include nothing about a 4XX HTTP response code
>> for the case in which the WS clients offers N WS subprotocols and the
>> server supports no one of them. Current text states that the server
>> MUST reply 101 without Sec-WebSocket-Protocol, so the client would
>> then MUST Fail_The_Connection.
>> 
>> There has been a long thread recently suggesting that in that case
>> (and just in *that* case) the server whould *reject* the GET request
>> with a *specific* HTTP status code which would mean "I don't support
>> any of your suggested WS protocols, so I cannot accept the WS session
>> because I have no idea what we are supposed to speak".
>> 
>> This is a new protocol, so feel *free* to create a new "HTTP" response
>> code for this case, maybe:
>> 
>>  488 WebSocket SubProtocol Not Supported
>> 
>> As I explained in other thread, this status code could help the human
>> user and the client application developer to realize that his software
>> is not up-to-date with the service requeriments ("your programm is too
>> old, upgrade please").
> 
> 
> Hi, any new consideration about this?
> Thanks a lot.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Iñaki Baz Castillo
> <ibc@aliax.net>
> _______________________________________________
> hybi mailing list
> hybi@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi