Hi, On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 3:58 PM, Chris Hegarty <chris.hega...@oracle.com> wrote: > At one point I thought the same, but after, yet another, re-reading of the RFC > I disagree. The semantics are somewhat stronger in WebSocket, albeit that > the wording is a little squirrely : > > 5.5.1 Close [1] > > It SHOULD do so as soon as practical. An > endpoint MAY delay sending a Close frame until its current message is > sent (for instance, if the majority of a fragmented message is > already sent, an endpoint MAY send the remaining fragments before > sending a Close frame).
And the disagreement is that TCP can send an unlimited amount of data in half closed state, while WebSocket *seems* to hint that it *may* send a *non specified* amount of fragments ? :) -- Simone Bordet http://bordet.blogspot.com --- Finally, no matter how good the architecture and design are, to deliver bug-free software with optimal performance and reliability, the implementation technique must be flawless. Victoria Livschitz