Hehe :-D :-D On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 11:29 PM, John Duncan <toomanysit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nevermind, was thinking of Silvio Cesare. He used to go by > silvioprogramming back in the 90s is why I asked. Sorry for the mixup! > > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 3:05 PM, silvioprog <silviop...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hello John, >> >> I'm sure this example will be very useful for us! :-) >> >> Thank you! >> >> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 9:59 PM, John Duncan <toomanysit...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> No problem. Thank you so much for your work on the library. It's >>> great! When I write some macros to do what's required I'll follow them up >>> with a mailing list post so others can use them if they want. Shouldn't >>> take too long to do. >>> >>> ~J >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 2:55 PM, Christian Grothoff <groth...@gnunet.org >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> On 03/18/2017 01:44 AM, John Duncan wrote: >>>> > Websockets and RFC6455. I noticed the test_upgrade.c unit test code >>>> > doesn't provide the accept handshake key combination hashing >>>> specified on >>>> > page 8 of the RFC, in the section "opening handshake." >>>> > >>>> > Apparently we're supposed to combine the websocket key with a >>>> predesignated >>>> > static GUID, hash it, and send it back. Without doing this, current >>>> > firefox refuses to accept a websocket connection to MHD. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > My question is, should I write this functionality myself or are there >>>> plans >>>> > for MHD to implement it in the future with macros or such? It seems >>>> very >>>> > easy to implement but I don't want to implement my own code if the >>>> library >>>> > has plans to implement this functionality for users directly. Don't >>>> want >>>> > to duplicate efforts etc. >>>> >>>> Right now, the expectation is that you need to write this yourself, at >>>> least I have no plans to do more in terms of API than what we have today >>>> with respect to "HTTP Upgrade". >>>> >>>> Happy hacking! >>>> >>>> Christian >>>> >>> >> -- >> Silvio Clécio >> > -- Silvio Clécio
