Re: [libmicrohttpd] Tiny request

[Christian Grothoff]

Dear Greg,

Yes, full support for WebSockets is more complex and an open feature
request for a while (https://gnunet.org/bugs/view.php?id=2102). I would
like to do this "right", but other things are keeping me busy.

I thought your patch's goal was merely to enable a slightly more
"compliant" failure situtation for WebSocket clients.  If Intel has a
strong need for 'real' WebSocket support in MHD, we should discuss this
off-list, as this not a 'tiny request' anymore ;-).


Happy hacking!

Christian

On 12/04/2014 01:39 AM, Junker, Gregory wrote:
> Thanks Christian
> 
> Unfortunately, I realized that is not actually enough. WebSocket uses
> the existing TCP connection with the webserver for further
> WebSocket-framed traffic. This requires that MHD "orphan" the
> MHD_Connection it originally set up for the incoming request (and
> release the existing socket descriptor to ownership and control of
> user code). I've been looking through the source in daemon.c and it
> looks like a fairly complex (various combinations of
> polling/not-polling/selecting/thread-or-not-thread-per-connection,
> and so on). Am I just overreading the amount of work, or is it
> actually non-trivial to pull this off?
> 
> Thanks again! Greg
> 
> -----Original Message----- From:
> address@hidden
> [mailto:address@hidden On
> Behalf Of Christian Grothoff Sent: Wednesday, December 3, 2014 3:47
> PM To: address@hidden Subject: Re: [libmicrohttpd] Tiny
> request
> 
> Done (SVN 34474). -Christian
> 
> On 12/04/2014 12:30 AM, Junker, Gregory wrote:
>> Hi all
>> 
>> I need a tiny addition made to connection.c.
>> 
>> In keepalive_possible(), can we change the line that says
>> 
>> if (0 == strcasecmp (end, "close"))
>> 
>> to
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> if (0 == strcasecmp (end, "close") || 0 == strcasecmp (end,
>> "upgrade"))
>> 
>> ?
>> 
>> This would make it possible to use libmicrohttpd in a WebSocket
>> (RFC6455) environment. Currently, the way that the WebSocket
>> protocol works, it sends "Connection: Upgrade" in the headers with
>> the initial handshake, which causes this check to fail and
>> (ultimately) insert "Connection: Keep-Alive" in the response
>> headers (which cause any compliant WebSocket client to fail the
>> handshake, since it needs "Connection: Upgrade" in the response
>> headers, and there is no way to remove this keepalive header from
>> the response from outside of MHD, as it is added automatically to
>> the response buffer).
>> 
>> Note that this is only an HTTP/1.1 issue, AFAIK (I am pretty sure,
>> though not positive, that WebSocket is not compatible with
>> HTTP/1.0).
>> 
>> Thanks! Greg
>> 
> 
>

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature