Websockets over HTTP/2

[riking]

Is gorilla/websocket going to be doing an experimental implementation of the Websockets+h2 draft, or waiting for it to go RFC?

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-h2-websockets-07

[elithrar]

I hadn’t seen that link! But still very early in the process, and WebSockets + HTTP/2 have been in limbo for a while. My confidence that this goes ahead in the next 6 months is low. I can say that no work is *planned*, although Gary may have thought about it. Saying all of that: we are open to design documents laying out what needs to be added and changed to support WS over HTTP/2.

…

On Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 10:07 AM Kane York ***@***.***> wrote: Is gorilla/websocket going to be doing an experimental implementation of the Websockets+h2 draft, or waiting for it to go RFC? https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-h2-websockets-07 — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#417>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABIcGGAx_3gGKGhO31_v_leTWHoFHtwks5uUtW5gaJpZM4WM3CD> .

[garyburd]

I prefer to let the browsers lead on protocol features. Do you know where browsers are with the proposal?

If it looks like one or more browsers will implement the RFC, then the implementation should be sketched out in case changes are needed to the net/http or golang.org/x/net/http2 packages.

I don't know of any plans to do this work.

[riking]

Yes, I was alerted to this via the blink-dev Intent To Ship where they say Mozilla also intends to implement it.

Intent to Implement: https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/topic/blink-dev/TQN4jWHydTk/discussion
Intent to Ship: https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/topic/blink-dev/7MCjXU3zmCQ/discussion
Chrome tracking bug: https://crbug.com/801564
Firefox tracking bug: (not very active, but Intent to Ship thread contains verbal confirmation that Mozilla is working on it) https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1434137

This probably isn't shipping before the end of the year, no.

[nhooyr]

This would require support from net/http for the CONNECT method protocol extension.

[nhooyr]

Some discussion also at nhooyr/websocket#4

[lxzan]

It's still TCP at the bottom, so there's no real point.

[nhooyr]

It's still TCP at the bottom, so there's no real point.

It's useful for the same reason it's useful for normal HTTP requests, built in pipelining. Means you can use a single TCP connection with multiple websockets instead of having to implement your own pipelining protocol over websockets.

Certainly not a game changer but a nice addition nonetheless.

[lxzan]

It's useful for the same reason it's useful for normal HTTP requests, built in pipelining. Means you can use a single TCP connection with multiple websockets instead of having to implement your own pipelining protocol over websockets.

Certainly not a game changer but a nice addition nonetheless.

It seems to reduce performance. Does the browser client support this?

TCP Stream => H2 Stream => WebSocket Frame

[nhooyr]

It seems to reduce performance. Does the browser client support this?

Depends on the use case.

Does the browser client support this?

Yes, browsers do support WebSockets over HTTP/2.

[meneses-matheus]

Any updates?