We also said previously that we would remove the old protocol due to security concerns about poisoning caches/proxies. We justified not immediately disabling -00 like other browsers did by saying that a new version addressing the issue would come soon. We've had 9 new versions since and have yet to update, which is not good. Microsoft and Mozilla both are targeting newer drafts.
Also, the protocol is in last call, and we're now at the point of just making editorial changes. It's stable, and it's time to update the implementation. On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Adam Barth <aba...@webkit.org> wrote: > I think it's important to move forward with the new protocol. I'm not > sure it matter too much what the transition plan is, but we should > eventually remove the implementation of the old protocol from WebKit. > No one else is going to implement the old protocol. > > Adam > > > On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Yuta Kitamura <yu...@chromium.org> wrote: > > Hello, > > I would like to propose to start implementing the new WebSocket protocol > > which is discussed in IETF HyBi working group. > > Protocol > > draft: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-09 > > JavaScript API draft: http://dev.w3.org/html5/websockets/ > > The new protocol is incompatible with the old one we are currently > > supporting. New additions include: > > - Binary frame support (Blob / ArrayBuffer) > > - Frame content masking (to solve security concern raised for the old > > draft) > > - Protocol extensions (such as frame compression) > > Because of the incompatibility, existing services using WebSockets are > going > > to break. However, I think this is a necessary cost we have to pay > > eventually, because: > > - Other browsers are going to support the new protocol. (Firefox Aurora > > already includes support for the new protocol.) > > - The earlier we switch the protocols, the smaller shock there will be. > > Safari and Chrome are the only browsers that support WebSocket (the old > > protocol) by default. > > - There is a security concern raised for the protocol we are currently > > supporting. > > * How to proceed > > My original plan was to implement the new protocol directly (i.e. > replacing > > the old implementation in-place). However Alexey (ap) objected to > dropping > > support for the old protocol immediately. > > So, I'm currently planning to add a runtime flag to switch the WebSocket > > protocols used by a WebCore's WebSocket implementation. Other > possibilities > > are to add a compile-time flag or to use (subversion's) branch, which are > > discussed at: > > https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60348 > > The discussion in this bug has been stalled for a while, but I really > would > > like to move forward. Comments and suggestions are greatly appreciated. > > Regards, > > Yuta > > > > _______________________________________________ > > webkit-dev mailing list > > webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org > > http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev > > > > > _______________________________________________ > webkit-dev mailing list > webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org > http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev >
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
