Re: WSGI 2.0 Round 2: requirements and call for interest

>>> **TL;DR: What do you believe WSGI 2.0 should and should not do? Should we do it at all?**
>> …
>>> - Support websockets
>>> - Support HTTP/2
>>
>> What does HTTP/2 support mean? What features of HTTP/2 need to be
>> exposed in the wsgi api?
>
> (CC-ing the list)
>
> The current WSGI API does not provide any consensus method for doing server push. Such a thing could absolutely be done as an extension to WSGI in its current form, and we should consider that.
>
> More generally, HTTP/2 is a bit more generous with what can be done with a stream than is the case in HTTP/1.1. For example, a stream could in principle be kept open indefinitely and used as a bi-directional communications channel: WSGI in its current form does not make that easy to do.
>

So will a general solution for both HTTP/2 and Websockets be exposing
the underlaying socket as an 'wsgi.fd' environment variable?



-- 
damjan
_______________________________________________
Web-SIG mailing list
[email protected]
Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig
Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/gcpw-web-sig%40m.gmane.org