Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
remove websocket status code meaning as it is replaced by the CLOSED …
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history 
…message.
  • Loading branch information
@fiatjaf
fiatjaf committed Dec 2, 2023
1 parent 131fcab commit 0ba4589
Showing 1 changed file with 0 additions and 4 deletions.
4 changes: 0 additions & 4 deletions 01.md
View file
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -96,10 +96,6 @@ These are just conventions and relay implementations may differ.

Relays expose a websocket endpoint to which clients can connect. Clients SHOULD open a single websocket connection to each relay and use it for all their subscriptions. Relays MAY limit number of connections from specific IP/client/etc.

### Meaning of WebSocket status codes

- When a websocket is closed by the relay with a status code `4000` that means the client shouldn't try to connect again.

### From client to relay: sending events and creating subscriptions

Clients can send 3 types of messages, which must be JSON arrays, according to the following patterns:
Expand Down

8 comments on commit 0ba4589

@mleku
Copy link

@mleku mleku commented on 0ba4589 Dec 3, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

too late but Cancel would have been a better name, since this does not close the socket.

@fiatjaf
Copy link
Member Author

@fiatjaf fiatjaf commented on 0ba4589 Dec 3, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It closes the subscription, like we already have a CLOSE message. But I agree maybe CANCEL would have been better.

@viktorvsk
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What does it mean? CLOSED event from relay to client with indication of specific subscription_id is not a substitute to what was removed. I've spent about an hour trying to find which exact code was responsible for that. And probably still gonna use it even though it was removed from NIP-01

@mikedilger
Copy link
Contributor

@mikedilger mikedilger commented on 0ba4589 Jan 15, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Shockingly I agree with @viktorvsk

Gossip client still implements code to detect status code 4000 and to not try reconnecting to relays that send it, and I think that eliminates unnecessary network connections. CLOSED on a subscription isn't enough of a "fuck off" signal for connections, only a "fuck off" about a particular subscription.

@fiatjaf
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If I remember correctly the only use case for the status code 4000 in the wild was nostr.wine telling unauthenticated clients to not try to send REQ and then Snort was trying to reconnect a million times because it didn't understand why the connection was being closed, so we reached that agreement and that time.

CLOSED replaces that and now nostr.wine can specify why it isn't serving the request and Snort can behave accordingly.

Besides that I don't see why would anyone need a hard "fuck off" -- that would be only for when the relay is being attacked by an evil or buggy client, but in that case the message code won't be respected anyway.

@fiatjaf
Copy link
Member Author

@fiatjaf fiatjaf commented on 0ba4589 Jan 15, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

nostr:nevent1qqs2rmj7yqtagc8mehu08zk9e5v2zsd4u0c4063t444xx3evsv0s78spzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezuamfdejszythwden5te0dehhxarj9ek82tntv5q3samnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwdehhxarjv96xjtnrdakszrthwden5te0dehhxtnvdakqz9nhwden5te0wfjkccte9ehx7um5wghxyctwvsq36amnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3dwp6kytnhv4kxcmmjv3jhytnwv46qh5e4d3

@mikedilger
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ok. It seemed useful to me, but maybe there is no practical use case.

@fiatjaf
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't know, I was just thinking of that specific use case, but if there are others we can bring this back. I think no relay has it implemented anymore (nostr.wine had it, but they changed to CLOSED), so it's better to not mention it, I think, unless a justification shows up.

Please sign in to comment.