News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on You might not need WebSockets. Parent comment

Re:You might not need WebSockets by koakuma-chan on Friday April 11, 2025 @09:02PM (#43660349)
SSE does not require a separate connection, unlike WebSockets.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:You might not need WebSockets by kaoD on Friday April 11, 2025 @10:04PM (#43660671)
MDN disagrees. See the huge red warning here https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/EventSource

Unless you mean on HTTP2? But aren't WS connections also multiplexed over HTTP2 in that case?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:You might not need WebSockets by koakuma-chan on Friday April 11, 2025 @10:12PM (#43660707)
> MDN disagrees. See the huge red warning here https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/EventSource

It should say "When used over HTTP/1" instead of "When not used over HTTP/2" because nowadays we also have HTTP/3, and browsers barely even use HTTP/1, so I would say it's pretty safe to ignore that warning.

> Unless you mean on HTTP2?

Any version of HTTP that supports multiplexing.

> But aren't WS connections also multiplexed over HTTP2 in that case?

There is RFC 8441 but I don't think it's actually implemented in the browsers.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:You might not need WebSockets by kaoD on Friday April 11, 2025 @10:38PM (#43660839)
> There is RFC 8441 but I don't think it's actually implemented in the browsers.

Found this: https://github.com/mattermost/mattermost/issues/30285

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:You might not need WebSockets by koakuma-chan on Friday April 11, 2025 @11:32PM (#43661101)
https://chromestatus.com/feature/6251293127475200

It looks like it's supported in Chrome and Firefox but not in Safari.

[ Parent | on HN ]