Re:You might not need WebSockets
by koakuma-chan on Saturday April 12, 2025 @07:38AM
(#43663528)
Where does that document say that WebTransport is just WebSockets over HTTP/3? The only thing in common is that both features provide reliable bi-directional streams, but WebTransport also supports unreliable streams and a bunch of other things. Please read the docs. There is also RFC 9220
Bootstrapping WebSockets with HTTP/3, which is literally WebSockets over HTTP/3.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
He said "basically" which should be interpreted as "roughly"? Then it seems his assert is roughly correct?
Re:You might not need WebSockets
by koakuma-chan on Saturday April 12, 2025 @11:09PM
(#43669758)
Maybe? Isn't WebSockets basically TCP? Roughly? I wrote that WebSockets provide reliable bi-directional streams, but it actually doesn't. It implements message framing. WebTransport also doesn't support "unreliable streams", it's actually called "datagrams". WebTransport doesn't even have to be used over HTTP/3 per the latest spec, so is it basically WebSockets reimplemented in HTTP/3? No.
> (...) but WebTransport also supports unreliable streams and a bunch of other things.
If you take some time to learn about WebTransport, you will eventually notice that if you remove HTTP/3 from if you remove each and every single feature that WebTransport touts as changes/improvements over WebSockets.