On 28/06/2013 17:00, Nick Williams wrote: > > On Jun 28, 2013, at 2:35 AM, ma...@apache.org wrote: > >> Author: markt Date: Fri Jun 28 07:35:49 2013 New Revision: 1497670 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1497670 Log: WebSocket 1.0, section >> 8.2 There is an implied restriction that any initial upgrade >> request must use HTTP GET. >> >> + !"GET".equals(((HttpServletRequest) >> request).getMethod())) { // Not an HTTP request that includes a >> valid upgrade request to // web socket + // Note: RFC >> 2616 does not limit HTTP upgrade to GET requests but + >> // the the Java WebSocket spec 1.0, section 8.2 implies such >> a + // limitation > > Unfortunate that the Java WebSocket spec is in direct contradiction > with the RFC spec.
Please provide a reference for the part of RFC 6455 you believe this change violates. > IMO, the RFC spec is the authority and it seems > like it should take precedence over the Java WebSocket spec. That > would be like the RFC HTTP spec saying "you must do X when header Y > is present" and the Java Servlet spec saying "you must not do X when > header Y is present." The Java WebSocket spec is clearly wrong here. I disagree with your view in precedence. > How clear is the Java WebSocket spec? Does it just /seem/ to indicate > this or does it /insist/ upon it? It implies only GET requests are permitted. The RFC is more specific. Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
