You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I would expect implementation of this feature to be optional, so it might make sense for it to use separate interface(s) that can take ownership of a request/response and return some stream(-like) resource representing the underlying connection. This could even perhaps live outside of wasi-http itself if we find a good pattern for representing this kind of "interface extension", similar to proposals in #4.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I suppose the obvious alternative here would be protocol-specific interfaces e.g. wasi-websocket, which would be implementable in browsers unlike a generic upgrade mechanism.
Both could also be supported, e.g. a wasi-websocket connection resource that can be obtained either by an upgrade interface that takes ownership of a wasi-http request/response or via a constrained browser-compatible outbound-websocket interface.
The HTTP "Upgrade" mechanism allows for a client and server to negotiate switching an HTTP connection to use another protocol. This is most notably used by WebSockets but has a few other uses including the popular WebTransport proposal.
I would expect implementation of this feature to be optional, so it might make sense for it to use separate interface(s) that can take ownership of a request/response and return some stream(-like) resource representing the underlying connection. This could even perhaps live outside of wasi-http itself if we find a good pattern for representing this kind of "interface extension", similar to proposals in #4.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: