Compression Extensions for WebSocket
RFC 7692
| Document | Type | RFC - Proposed Standard (December 2015; Errata) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Takeshi Yoshino | ||
| Last updated | 2017-03-30 | ||
| Stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | plain text html pdf htmlized bibtex | ||
| Reviews | |||
| Stream | WG state | Submitted to IESG for Publication | |
| Document shepherd | Salvatore Loreto | ||
| Shepherd write-up | Show (last changed 2015-05-02) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | RFC 7692 (Proposed Standard) | |
| Action Holders |
(None)
|
||
| Consensus Boilerplate | Yes | ||
| Telechat date | |||
| Responsible AD | Barry Leiba | ||
| IESG note | Salvatore Loreto (salvatore.loreto@ericsson.com) is the document shepherd. | ||
| Send notices to | (None) | ||
| IANA | IANA review state | Version Changed - Review Needed | |
| IANA action state | RFC-Ed-Ack | ||
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) T. Yoshino
Request for Comments: 7692 Google, Inc.
Category: Standards Track December 2015
ISSN: 2070-1721
Compression Extensions for WebSocket
Abstract
This document defines a framework for creating WebSocket extensions
that add compression functionality to the WebSocket Protocol. An
extension based on this framework compresses the payload data portion
of WebSocket data messages on a per-message basis using parameters
negotiated during the opening handshake. This framework provides a
general method for applying a compression algorithm to the contents
of WebSocket messages. Each compression algorithm has to be defined
in a document defining the extension by specifying the parameter
negotiation and the payload transformation algorithm in detail. This
document also specifies one specific compression extension using the
DEFLATE algorithm.
Status of This Memo
This is an Internet Standards Track document.
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
received public review and has been approved for publication by the
Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.
Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7692.
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 1]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ....................................................3
2. Conformance Requirements and Terminology ........................3
3. Complementary Terminology .......................................4
4. WebSocket Per-Message Compression Extension .....................5
5. Extension Negotiation ...........................................5
5.1. General Negotiation Flow ...................................9
5.2. Negotiation Examples .......................................9
6. Framing ........................................................10
6.1. Compression ...............................................10
6.2. Decompression .............................................12
7. The "permessage-deflate" Extension .............................12
7.1. Extension Parameters ......................................14
7.1.1. Context Takeover Control ...........................14
7.1.2. Limiting the LZ77 Sliding Window Size ..............16
7.1.3. Examples ...........................................18
7.2. Message Payload Transformation ............................19
7.2.1. Compression ........................................19
7.2.2. Decompression ......................................21
7.2.3. Examples ...........................................22
7.3. Implementation Notes ......................................25
8. Security Considerations ........................................25
9. IANA Considerations ............................................26
9.1. Registration of the "permessage-deflate" WebSocket
Extension Name ............................................26
9.2. Registration of the "Per-Message Compressed"
WebSocket Framing Header Bit ..............................26
10. References ....................................................27
10.1. Normative References .....................................27
10.2. Informative References ...................................27
Acknowledgements ..................................................28
Author's Address ..................................................28
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 2]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
1. Introduction
This document specifies a framework for adding compression
functionality to the WebSocket Protocol [RFC6455]. The framework
specifies how to define WebSocket Per-Message Compression Extensions
(PMCEs) for a compression algorithm based on the extension concept of
the WebSocket Protocol specified in Section 9 of [RFC6455]. A
WebSocket client and a peer WebSocket server negotiate the use of a
PMCE and determine the parameters required to configure the
compression algorithm during the WebSocket opening handshake. The
client and server can then exchange data messages whose frames
contain compressed data in the payload data portion.
This framework only specifies a general method for applying a
compression algorithm to the contents of WebSocket messages. Each
individual PMCE has to be specified in a document describing in
detail how to negotiate the configuration parameters for the specific
compression algorithm used by that PMCE and how to transform
(compress and decompress) data in the payload data portion.
A WebSocket client may offer multiple PMCEs during the WebSocket
opening handshake. A peer WebSocket server receiving the offer may
choose to accept the preferred PMCE or decline all of them. PMCEs
use the RSV1 bit of the WebSocket frame header to indicate whether a
message is compressed or not so that an endpoint can choose not to
compress messages with incompressible contents.
This document also specifies one specific PMCE based on the DEFLATE
[RFC1951] algorithm. The DEFLATE algorithm is widely available on
various platforms, and its overhead is small. The extension name of
this PMCE is "permessage-deflate". To align the end of compressed
data to an octet boundary, this extension uses the algorithm
described in Section 2.1 of [RFC1979]. Endpoints can take over the
LZ77 sliding window [LZ77] used to build frames for previous messages
to achieve a better compression ratio. For resource-limited devices,
this extension provides parameters to limit memory usage for
compression context.
2. Conformance Requirements and Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
Requirements phrased in the imperative as part of algorithms (such as
"strip any leading space characters" or "return false and abort these
steps") are to be interpreted with the meaning of the key word
("MUST", "SHOULD", "MAY", etc.) used in introducing the algorithm.
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 3]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
Conformance requirements phrased as algorithms or specific steps can
be implemented in any manner, so long as the end result is
equivalent. In particular, the algorithms defined in this
specification are intended to be easy to understand and are not
intended to be performant.
This document references the procedure to _Fail the WebSocket
Connection_. This procedure is defined in Section 7.1.7 of
[RFC6455].
This document references the event that _The WebSocket Connection is
Established_ and the event that _A WebSocket Message Has Been
Received_. These events are defined in Sections 4.1 and 6.2,
respectively, of [RFC6455].
This document uses the Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF) notation of
[RFC5234]. The DIGIT (decimal 0-9) rule is included by reference, as
defined in the Appendix B.1 of [RFC5234].
3. Complementary Terminology
This document defines some terms about WebSocket and WebSocket
extension mechanisms that are underspecified or not defined at all in
[RFC6455].
data message - a message consisting of data frames as defined in
Section 5.6 of [RFC6455].
message payload (or payload of a message) - the concatenation of the
payload data portion of all data frames (see Section 6.2 of
[RFC6455]) representing a single message.
next extension in use after extension X - the next extension listed
after X in the "Sec-WebSocket-Extensions" header in the server's
opening handshake as defined in Section 9.1 of [RFC6455]. Such an
extension is applied to outgoing data from the application right
after X on the sender side but is applied right before X to incoming
data from the underlying transport.
extension in use preceding extension X - the extension listed right
before X in the "Sec-WebSocket-Extensions" header in the server's
opening handshake. Such an extension is applied to outgoing data
from the application right before X on the sender side but is applied
right after X to incoming data from the underlying transport.
extension negotiation offer - each element in the "Sec-WebSocket-
Extensions" header in the client's opening handshake.
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 4]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
extension negotiation response - each element in the "Sec-WebSocket-
Extensions" header in the server's opening handshake.
corresponding extension negotiation response for an extension
negotiation offer - an extension negotiation response that a server
sends back to the peer client containing the same extension name as
the offer and meeting the requirements represented by the offer.
Accepting an extension negotiation offer - including a corresponding
extension negotiation response for the offer in the "Sec-WebSocket-
Extensions" header in the server's opening handshake.
Declining an extension negotiation offer - not including a
corresponding extension negotiation response for the offer in the
"Sec-WebSocket-Extensions" header in the server's opening handshake.
4. WebSocket Per-Message Compression Extension
WebSocket PMCEs are extensions to the WebSocket Protocol enabling
compression functionality. PMCEs are built based on the extension
concept of the WebSocket Protocol specified in Section 9 of
[RFC6455]. PMCEs are individually defined for each compression
algorithm to be implemented and are registered in the "WebSocket
Extension Name Registry" created in Section 11.4 of [RFC6455]. Each
PMCE referring to this framework MUST define the following:
o The extension name of the PMCE and any applicable extension
parameters that MUST be included in the "Sec-WebSocket-Extensions"
header during the extension negotiation offer/response.
o How to interpret the extension parameters exchanged during the
opening handshake.
o How to transform the payload of a message.
One PMCE is defined in Section 7 of this document and is registered
in Section 9. Other PMCEs may be defined in the future in other
documents.
Section 5 describes the basic extension negotiation process.
Section 6 describes how to apply the compression algorithm with
negotiated parameters to the contents of WebSocket messages.
5. Extension Negotiation
To offer use of a PMCE, a client MUST include the extension name of
the PMCE in the "Sec-WebSocket-Extensions" header field of its
opening handshake of the WebSocket connection. Extension parameters
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 5]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
are used to specify the PMCE offer in detail. For example, a client
lists its preferred configuration parameter values for the
compression algorithm of the PMCE. A client may also offer multiple
PMCE choices to the server by including multiple elements in the
"Sec-WebSocket-Extensions" header, one for each PMCE offered. This
set of elements MAY include multiple PMCEs with the same extension
name to offer the possibility to use the same algorithm with
different configuration parameters. The order of elements is
important as it specifies the client's preference. An element
preceding another element has higher preference. It is recommended
that a server accepts PMCEs with higher preference if the server
supports them.
A PMCE negotiation offer provides requests and/or hints to the
server.
A request in a PMCE negotiation offer indicates constraints on the
server's behavior that must be satisfied if the server accepts the
offer. For example, suppose that a server sends data compressed with
the DEFLATE algorithm to a client. The server must keep the original
bytes of data that it recently compressed and sent to the client.
The client must keep the result of decompressing the bytes of data
that it recently received from the server. The amount of bytes of
data kept is called the LZ77 window size. The LZ77 window size of
the client must not be less than the LZ77 window size of the server.
In a PMCE negotiation offer, the client MUST inform the server of its
LZ77 window size so that the server uses an LZ77 window size that is
not greater than the LZ77 window size of the client. This
restriction on the LZ77 window size is an example of a request in a
PMCE negotiation offer.
A hint in a PMCE negotiation offer provides information about the
client's behavior that the server may either safely ignore or refer
to when the server decides its behavior. For example, suppose that a
client sends data compressed with the DEFLATE algorithm to a server.
The client must keep the original bytes of data that it recently
compressed and sent to the server. The server must keep the result
of decompressing the bytes of data that it recently received from the
client. The LZ77 window size of the server must not be less than the
LZ77 window size of the client. In a PMCE negotiation offer, the
client MAY inform the server of the maximum LZ77 window size the
client can afford so that the server can choose to use an LZ77 window
size that is not greater than the maximum size of the client. This
information is an example of a hint in a PMCE negotiation offer.
It's waste of memory to use an LZ77 window size greater than the LZ77
window size the client actually uses. Using the hint, the server can
avoid the waste of memory. Since the hint itself doesn't specify the
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 6]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
constraints on the endpoints, the server must use the "agreed
parameters" (defined below) to explicitly ask the client not to use
an LZ77 window size greater than the LZ77 window size of the server.
To accept the use of an offered PMCE, a server MUST include the
extension name of the PMCE in the "Sec-WebSocket-Extensions" header
field of its opening handshake of the WebSocket connection.
Extension parameters represent the detailed configuration parameters
for the PMCE to use. These extension parameters and their values are
called "agreed parameters". The element MUST represent a PMCE that
is fully supported by the server. The contents of the element don't
need to be exactly the same as those of the received extension
negotiation offers. For example, suppose that a server received a
PMCE extension negotiation offer with an extension parameter "X"
indicating that the client can enable an optional feature named X.
The server may accept the PMCE offer with an element without the
extension parameter "X", meaning that the server chose not to enable
the feature X. In this case, the offer contains the extension
parameter "X", but the "agreed parameters" don't contain the
extension parameter "X".
"Agreed parameters" must represent how the requests and hints in the
client's extension negotiation offer have been handled in addition to
the server's requests and hints on the client's behavior, so that the
client can configure its behavior without identifying exactly which
PMCE extension negotiation offer has been accepted.
For example, if a client sends an extension negotiation offer that
includes a parameter "enable_compression" and another without this
parameter, the server accepts the former and informs the client by
sending back an element that includes parameter(s) acknowledging
"enable_compression". The name of the acknowledging parameter
doesn't need to be exactly the same as the offer. For example, two
parameters, "enable_strong_compression" and
"enable_weak_compression", may be defined as acknowledging parameters
for "enable_compression".
Compression features can be applied differently for each direction.
For such features, the acknowledging parameter and the parameter in
the reverse direction must be chosen to distinguish them. For
example, in order to make parameters distinguishable, a "server_"
prefix can be added to parameters affecting data sent from a server,
and a "client_" prefix can be added to parameters affecting data sent
from a client.
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 7]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
A server MUST NOT accept a PMCE extension negotiation offer together
with another extension if the PMCE will conflict with the extension
on their use of the RSV1 bit. A client that received a response
accepting a PMCE extension negotiation offer together with such an
extension MUST _Fail the WebSocket Connection_.
A server MUST NOT accept a PMCE extension negotiation offer together
with another extension if the PMCE will be applied to the output of
the extension and any of the following conditions applies to the
extension:
o The extension requires the boundary of frames to be preserved
between the output from the extension at the sender and the input
to the extension at the receiver.
o The extension uses the "Extension data" field or any of the
reserved bits on the WebSocket header as a per-frame attribute.
A client that receives a response accepting a PMCE extension
negotiation offer together with such an extension MUST _Fail the
WebSocket Connection_.
A server declining all offered PMCEs MUST NOT include any element
with PMCE names. If a server responds with no PMCE element in the
"Sec-WebSocket-Extensions" header, both endpoints proceed without
per-message compression once _the WebSocket Connection is
established_.
If a server gives an invalid response, such as accepting a PMCE that
the client did not offer, the client MUST _Fail the WebSocket
Connection_.
If a server responds with a valid PMCE element in the "Sec-WebSocket-
Extensions" header and _the WebSocket Connection is established_,
both endpoints MUST use the algorithm described in Section 6 and the
message payload transformation (compressing and decompressing)
procedure of the PMCE configured with the "agreed parameters"
returned by the server to exchange messages.
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 8]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
5.1. General Negotiation Flow
This section describes a general negotiation flow. How to handle
parameters in detail must be specified in the document specifying the
PMCE.
A client makes an offer including parameters identifying the
following:
o Hints about how the client is planning to compress data
o Requests about how the server compresses data
o Limitations concerning the client's compression functionality
The peer server makes a determination of its behavior based on these
parameters. If the server can and wants to proceed with this PMCE
enabled, the server responds to the client with parameters
identifying the following:
o Requests about how the client compresses data
o How the server will compress data
Based on these parameters received from the server, the client
determines its behavior and if it can and wants to proceed with this
PMCE enabled. Otherwise, the client starts the closing handshake
with close code 1010.
5.2. Negotiation Examples
The following are example values for the "Sec-WebSocket-Extensions"
header offering PMCEs; permessage-foo and permessage-bar in the
examples are hypothetical extension names of PMCEs for the
compression algorithm foo and bar.
o Offer the permessage-foo.
permessage-foo
o Offer the permessage-foo with a parameter x with a value of 10.
permessage-foo; x=10
The value may be quoted.
permessage-foo; x="10"
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 9]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
o Offer the permessage-foo as first choice and the permessage-bar as
a fallback plan.
permessage-foo, permessage-bar
o Offer the permessage-foo with a parameter use_y, which enables a
feature y as first choice, and the permessage-foo without the
use_y parameter as a fallback plan.
permessage-foo; use_y, permessage-foo
6. Framing
PMCEs operate only on data messages.
This document allocates the RSV1 bit of the WebSocket header for
PMCEs and calls the bit the "Per-Message Compressed" bit. On a
WebSocket connection where a PMCE is in use, this bit indicates
whether a message is compressed or not.
A message with the "Per-Message Compressed" bit set on the first
fragment of the message is called a "compressed message". Frames of
a compressed message have compressed data in the payload data
portion. An endpoint receiving a compressed message decompresses the
concatenation of the compressed data of the frames of the message by
following the decompression procedure specified by the PMCE in use.
The endpoint uses the bytes corresponding to the application data
portion in this decompressed data for the _A WebSocket Message Has
Been Received_ event instead of the received data as is.
A message with the "Per-Message Compressed" bit unset on the first
fragment of the message is called an "uncompressed message". Frames
of an uncompressed message have uncompressed original data as is in
the payload data portion. An endpoint receiving an uncompressed
message uses the concatenation of the application data portion of the
frames of the message as is for the _A WebSocket Message Has Been
Received_ event.
6.1. Compression
An endpoint MUST use the following algorithm to send a message in the
form of a compressed message.
1. Compress the message payload of the original message by following
the compression procedure of the PMCE. The original message may
be input from the application layer or output of another
WebSocket extension, depending on which extensions were
negotiated.
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 10]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
2. Process the compressed data as follows:
* If this PMCE is the last extension to process outgoing
messages, build frame(s) using the compressed data instead of
the original data for the message payload, set the "Per-
Message Compressed" bit of the first frame, and then send the
frame(s) as described in Section 6.1 of [RFC6455].
* Otherwise, pass the transformed message payload and modified
header values, including the "Per-Message Compressed" bit
value set to 1, to the next extension after the PMCE. If the
extension expects frames for input, build a frame for the
message and pass it.
An endpoint MUST use the following algorithm to send a message in the
form of an uncompressed message.
1. Process the original data as follows:
* If this PMCE is the last extension to process outgoing
messages, build frame(s) using the original data for the
payload data portion as is, unset the "Per-Message Compressed"
bit of the first frame, and then send the frame(s) as
described in Section 6.1 of [RFC6455].
* Otherwise, pass the message payload and header values to the
next extension after the PMCE as is. If the extension expects
frames for input, build a frame for the message and pass it.
An endpoint MUST NOT set the "Per-Message Compressed" bit of control
frames and non-first fragments of a data message. An endpoint
receiving such a frame MUST _Fail the WebSocket Connection_.
PMCEs do not change the opcode field. The opcode of the first frame
of a compressed message indicates the opcode of the original message.
The payload data portion in frames generated by a PMCE is not subject
to the constraints for the original data type. For example, the
concatenation of the output data corresponding to the application
data portion of frames of a compressed text message is not required
to be valid UTF-8. At the receiver, the payload data portion after
decompression is subject to the constraints for the original data
type again.
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 11]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
6.2. Decompression
An endpoint MUST use the following algorithm to receive a message in
the form of a compressed message.
1. Concatenate the payload data portion of the received frames of
the compressed message. The received frames may be direct input
from the underlying transport or output of another WebSocket
extension, depending on which extensions were negotiated.
2. Decompress the concatenation by following the decompression
procedure of the PMCE.
3. Process the decompressed message as follows:
* If this is the last extension to process incoming messages,
deliver the _A WebSocket Message Has Been Received_ event to
the application layer with the decompressed message payload
and header values, including the "Per-Message Compressed" bit
unset to 0.
* Otherwise, pass the decompressed message payload and header
values, including the "Per-Message Compressed" bit unset to 0,
to the extension preceding the PMCE. If the extension expects
frames for input, build a frame for the message and pass it.
An endpoint MUST use the following algorithm to receive a message in
the form of an uncompressed message.
1. Process the received message as follows:
* If this PMCE is the last extension to process incoming
messages, deliver the _A WebSocket Message Has Been Received_
event to the application layer with the received message
payload and header values as is.
* Otherwise, pass the message payload and header values to the
extension preceding the PMCE as is. If the extension expects
frames for input, build a frame for the message and pass it.
7. The "permessage-deflate" Extension
This section defines a specific PMCE called "permessage-deflate". It
compresses the payload of a message using the DEFLATE algorithm
[RFC1951] and uses the byte boundary alignment method introduced in
[RFC1979].
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 12]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
This section uses the term "byte" with the same meaning as used in
[RFC1951], i.e., 8 bits stored or transmitted as a unit (same as an
octet).
The registered extension name for this extension is "permessage-
deflate".
Four extension parameters are defined for "permessage-deflate" to
help endpoints manage per-connection resource usage.
o "server_no_context_takeover"
o "client_no_context_takeover"
o "server_max_window_bits"
o "client_max_window_bits"
These parameters enable two methods (no_context_takeover and
max_window_bits) of constraining memory usage that may be applied
independently to either direction of WebSocket traffic. The
extension parameters with the "client_" prefix are used by the client
to configure its compressor and by the server to configure its
decompressor. The extension parameters with the "server_" prefix are
used by the server to configure its compressor and by the client to
configure its decompressor. All four parameters are defined for both
a client's extension negotiation offer and a server's extension
negotiation response.
A server MUST decline an extension negotiation offer for this
extension if any of the following conditions are met:
o The negotiation offer contains an extension parameter not defined
for use in an offer.
o The negotiation offer contains an extension parameter with an
invalid value.
o The negotiation offer contains multiple extension parameters with
the same name.
o The server doesn't support the offered configuration.
A client MUST _Fail the WebSocket Connection_ if the peer server
accepted an extension negotiation offer for this extension with an
extension negotiation response meeting any of the following
conditions:
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 13]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
o The negotiation response contains an extension parameter not
defined for use in a response.
o The negotiation response contains an extension parameter with an
invalid value.
o The negotiation response contains multiple extension parameters
with the same name.
o The client does not support the configuration that the response
represents.
The term "LZ77 sliding window" [LZ77] used in this section means the
buffer used by the DEFLATE algorithm to store recently processed
input. The DEFLATE compression algorithm searches the buffer for a
match with the following input.
The term "use context takeover" used in this section means that the
same LZ77 sliding window used by the endpoint to build frames of the
previous sent message is reused to build frames of the next message
to be sent.
7.1. Extension Parameters
7.1.1. Context Takeover Control
7.1.1.1. The "server_no_context_takeover" Extension Parameter
A client MAY include the "server_no_context_takeover" extension
parameter in an extension negotiation offer. This extension
parameter has no value. By including this extension parameter in an
extension negotiation offer, a client prevents the peer server from
using context takeover. If the peer server doesn't use context
takeover, the client doesn't need to reserve memory to retain the
LZ77 sliding window between messages.
Absence of this extension parameter in an extension negotiation offer
indicates that the client can decompress a message that the server
built using context takeover.
A server accepts an extension negotiation offer that includes the
"server_no_context_takeover" extension parameter by including the
"server_no_context_takeover" extension parameter in the corresponding
extension negotiation response to send back to the client. The
"server_no_context_takeover" extension parameter in an extension
negotiation response has no value.
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 14]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
It is RECOMMENDED that a server supports the
"server_no_context_takeover" extension parameter in an extension
negotiation offer.
A server MAY include the "server_no_context_takeover" extension
parameter in an extension negotiation response even if the extension
negotiation offer being accepted by the extension negotiation
response didn't include the "server_no_context_takeover" extension
parameter.
7.1.1.2. The "client_no_context_takeover" Extension Parameter
A client MAY include the "client_no_context_takeover" extension
parameter in an extension negotiation offer. This extension
parameter has no value. By including this extension parameter in an
extension negotiation offer, a client informs the peer server of a
hint that even if the server doesn't include the
"client_no_context_takeover" extension parameter in the corresponding
extension negotiation response to the offer, the client is not going
to use context takeover.
A server MAY include the "client_no_context_takeover" extension
parameter in an extension negotiation response. If the received
extension negotiation offer includes the "client_no_context_takeover"
extension parameter, the server may either ignore the parameter or
use the parameter to avoid taking over the LZ77 sliding window
unnecessarily by including the "client_no_context_takeover" extension
parameter in the corresponding extension negotiation response to the
offer. The "client_no_context_takeover" extension parameter in an
extension negotiation response has no value. By including the
"client_no_context_takeover" extension parameter in an extension
negotiation response, a server prevents the peer client from using
context takeover. This reduces the amount of memory that the server
has to reserve for the connection.
Absence of this extension parameter in an extension negotiation
response indicates that the server can decompress messages built by
the client using context takeover.
A client MUST support the "client_no_context_takeover" extension
parameter in an extension negotiation response.
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 15]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
7.1.2. Limiting the LZ77 Sliding Window Size
7.1.2.1. The "server_max_window_bits" Extension Parameter
A client MAY include the "server_max_window_bits" extension parameter
in an extension negotiation offer. This parameter has a decimal
integer value without leading zeroes between 8 to 15, inclusive,
indicating the base-2 logarithm of the LZ77 sliding window size, and
MUST conform to the ABNF below.
server-max-window-bits = 1*DIGIT
By including this parameter in an extension negotiation offer, a
client limits the LZ77 sliding window size that the server will use
to compress messages. If the peer server uses a small LZ77 sliding
window to compress messages, the client can reduce the memory needed
for the LZ77 sliding window.
A server declines an extension negotiation offer with this parameter
if the server doesn't support it.
Absence of this parameter in an extension negotiation offer indicates
that the client can receive messages compressed using an LZ77 sliding
window of up to 32,768 bytes.
A server accepts an extension negotiation offer with this parameter
by including the "server_max_window_bits" extension parameter in the
extension negotiation response to send back to the client with the
same or smaller value as the offer. The "server_max_window_bits"
extension parameter in an extension negotiation response has a
decimal integer value without leading zeroes between 8 to 15,
inclusive, indicating the base-2 logarithm of the LZ77 sliding window
size, and MUST conform to the ABNF below.
server-max-window-bits = 1*DIGIT
A server MAY include the "server_max_window_bits" extension parameter
in an extension negotiation response even if the extension
negotiation offer being accepted by the response didn't include the
"server_max_window_bits" extension parameter.
7.1.2.2. The "client_max_window_bits" Extension Parameter
A client MAY include the "client_max_window_bits" extension parameter
in an extension negotiation offer. This parameter has no value or a
decimal integer value without leading zeroes between 8 to 15
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 16]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
inclusive indicating the base-2 logarithm of the LZ77 sliding window
size. If a value is specified for this parameter, the value MUST
conform to the ABNF below.
client-max-window-bits = 1*DIGIT
By including this parameter in an offer, a client informs the peer
server that the client supports the "client_max_window_bits"
extension parameter in an extension negotiation response and,
optionally, a hint by attaching a value to the parameter. If the
"client_max_window_bits" extension parameter in an extension
negotiation offer has a value, the parameter also informs the peer
server of a hint that even if the server doesn't include the
"client_max_window_bits" extension parameter in the corresponding
extension negotiation response with a value greater than the one in
the extension negotiation offer or if the server doesn't include the
extension parameter at all, the client is not going to use an LZ77
sliding window size greater than the size specified by the value in
the extension negotiation offer to compress messages.
If a received extension negotiation offer has the
"client_max_window_bits" extension parameter, the server MAY include
the "client_max_window_bits" extension parameter in the corresponding
extension negotiation response to the offer. If the
"client_max_window_bits" extension parameter in a received extension
negotiation offer has a value, the server may either ignore this
value or use this value to avoid allocating an unnecessarily big LZ77
sliding window by including the "client_max_window_bits" extension
parameter in the corresponding extension negotiation response to the
offer with a value equal to or smaller than the received value. The
"client_max_window_bits" extension parameter in an extension
negotiation response has a decimal integer value without leading
zeroes between 8 to 15 inclusive indicating the base-2 logarithm of
the LZ77 sliding window size and MUST conform to the ABNF below.
client-max-window-bits = 1*DIGIT
By including this extension parameter in an extension negotiation
response, a server limits the LZ77 sliding window size that the
client uses to compress messages. This reduces the amount of memory
for the decompression context that the server has to reserve for the
connection.
If a received extension negotiation offer doesn't have the
"client_max_window_bits" extension parameter, the corresponding
extension negotiation response to the offer MUST NOT include the
"client_max_window_bits" extension parameter.
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 17]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
Absence of this extension parameter in an extension negotiation
response indicates that the server can receive messages compressed
using an LZ77 sliding window of up to 32,768 bytes.
7.1.3. Examples
The simplest "Sec-WebSocket-Extensions" header in a client's opening
handshake to offer use of the "permessage-deflate" extension looks
like this:
Sec-WebSocket-Extensions: permessage-deflate
Since the "client_max_window_bits" extension parameter is not
included in this extension negotiation offer, the server must not
accept the offer with an extension negotiation response that includes
the "client_max_window_bits" extension parameter. The simplest "Sec-
WebSocket-Extensions" header in a server's opening handshake to
accept use of the "permessage-deflate" extension is the same:
Sec-WebSocket-Extensions: permessage-deflate
The following extension negotiation offer sent by a client is asking
the server to use an LZ77 sliding window with a size of 1,024 bytes
or less and declaring that the client supports the
"client_max_window_bits" extension parameter in an extension
negotiation response.
Sec-WebSocket-Extensions:
permessage-deflate;
client_max_window_bits; server_max_window_bits=10
This extension negotiation offer might be rejected by the server
because the server doesn't support the "server_max_window_bits"
extension parameter in an extension negotiation offer. This is fine
if the client cannot receive messages compressed using a larger
sliding window size, but if the client just prefers using a small
window but wants to fall back to the "permessage-deflate" without the
"server_max_window_bits" extension parameter, the client can make an
offer with the fallback option like this:
Sec-WebSocket-Extensions:
permessage-deflate;
client_max_window_bits; server_max_window_bits=10,
permessage-deflate;
client_max_window_bits
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 18]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
The server can accept "permessage-deflate" by picking any supported
one from the listed offers. To accept the first option, for example,
the server may send back a response as follows:
Sec-WebSocket-Extensions:
permessage-deflate; server_max_window_bits=10
To accept the second option, for example, the server may send back a
response as follows:
Sec-WebSocket-Extensions: permessage-deflate
7.2. Message Payload Transformation
7.2.1. Compression
An endpoint uses the following algorithm to compress a message.
1. Compress all the octets of the payload of the message using
DEFLATE.
2. If the resulting data does not end with an empty DEFLATE block
with no compression (the "BTYPE" bits are set to 00), append an
empty DEFLATE block with no compression to the tail end.
3. Remove 4 octets (that are 0x00 0x00 0xff 0xff) from the tail end.
After this step, the last octet of the compressed data contains
(possibly part of) the DEFLATE header bits with the "BTYPE" bits
set to 00.
When using DEFLATE in the first step above:
o An endpoint MAY use multiple DEFLATE blocks to compress one
message.
o An endpoint MAY use DEFLATE blocks of any type.
o An endpoint MAY use both DEFLATE blocks with the "BFINAL" bit set
to 0 and DEFLATE blocks with the "BFINAL" bit set to 1.
o When any DEFLATE block with the "BFINAL" bit set to 1 doesn't end
at a byte boundary, an endpoint MUST add minimal padding bits of 0
to make it end at a byte boundary. The next DEFLATE block follows
the padded data if any.
An endpoint fragments a compressed message by splitting the result of
running this algorithm. Even when only part of the payload is
available, a fragment can be built by compressing the available data
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 19]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
and choosing the block type appropriately so that the end of the
resulting compressed data is aligned at a byte boundary. Note that
for non-final fragments, the removal of 0x00 0x00 0xff 0xff MUST NOT
be done.
An endpoint MUST NOT use an LZ77 sliding window longer than 32,768
bytes to compress messages to send.
If the "agreed parameters" contain the "client_no_context_takeover"
extension parameter, the client MUST start compressing each new
message with an empty LZ77 sliding window. Otherwise, the client MAY
take over the LZ77 sliding window used to build the last compressed
message. Note that even if the client has included the
"client_no_context_takeover" extension parameter in its offer, the
client MAY take over the LZ77 sliding window used to build the last
compressed message if the "agreed parameters" don't contain the
"client_no_context_takeover" extension parameter. The client-to-
server "client_no_context_takeover" extension parameter is just a
hint for the server to build an extension negotiation response.
If the "agreed parameters" contain the "server_no_context_takeover"
extension parameter, the server MUST start compressing each new
message with an empty LZ77 sliding window. Otherwise, the server MAY
take over the LZ77 sliding window used to build the last compressed
message.
If the "agreed parameters" contain the "client_max_window_bits"
extension parameter with a value of w, the client MUST NOT use an
LZ77 sliding window longer than the w-th power of 2 bytes to compress
messages to send. Note that even if the client has included in its
offer the "client_max_window_bits" extension parameter with a value
smaller than one in the "agreed parameters", the client MAY use an
LZ77 sliding window with any size to compress messages to send as
long as the size conforms to the "agreed parameters". The client-to-
server "client_max_window_bits" extension parameter is just a hint
for the server to build an extension negotiation response.
If the "agreed parameters" contain the "server_max_window_bits"
extension parameter with a value of w, the server MUST NOT use an
LZ77 sliding window longer than the w-th power of 2 bytes to compress
messages to send.
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 20]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
7.2.2. Decompression
An endpoint uses the following algorithm to decompress a message.
1. Append 4 octets of 0x00 0x00 0xff 0xff to the tail end of the
payload of the message.
2. Decompress the resulting data using DEFLATE.
If the "agreed parameters" contain the "server_no_context_takeover"
extension parameter, the client MAY decompress each new message with
an empty LZ77 sliding window. Otherwise, the client MUST decompress
each new message using the LZ77 sliding window used to process the
last compressed message.
If the "agreed parameters" contain the "client_no_context_takeover"
extension parameter, the server MAY decompress each new message with
an empty LZ77 sliding window. Otherwise, the server MUST decompress
each new message using the LZ77 sliding window used to process the
last compressed message. Note that even if the client has included
the "client_no_context_takeover" extension parameter in its offer,
the server MUST decompress each new message using the LZ77 sliding
window used to process the last compressed message if the "agreed
parameters" don't contain the "client_no_context_takeover" extension
parameter. The client-to-server "client_no_context_takeover"
extension parameter is just a hint for the server to build an
extension negotiation response.
If the "agreed parameters" contain the "server_max_window_bits"
extension parameter with a value of w, the client MAY reduce the size
of its LZ77 sliding window to decompress received messages down to
the w-th power of 2 bytes. Otherwise, the client MUST use a
32,768-byte LZ77 sliding window to decompress received messages.
If the "agreed parameters" contain the "client_max_window_bits"
extension parameter with a value of w, the server MAY reduce the size
of its LZ77 sliding window to decompress received messages down to
the w-th power of 2 bytes. Otherwise, the server MUST use a
32,768-byte LZ77 sliding window to decompress received messages.
Note that even if the client has included in its offer the
"client_max_window_bits" extension parameter with a value smaller
than one in the "agreed parameters", the client MUST use an LZ77
sliding window of a size that conforms the "agreed parameters" to
compress messages to send. The client-to-server
"client_max_window_bits" extension parameter is just a hint for the
server to build an extension negotiation response.
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 21]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
7.2.3. Examples
This section introduces examples of how the "permessage-deflate"
extension transforms messages.
7.2.3.1. A Message Compressed Using One Compressed DEFLATE Block
Suppose that an endpoint sends a text message "Hello". If the
endpoint uses one compressed DEFLATE block (compressed with fixed
Huffman code and the "BFINAL" bit not set) to compress the message,
the endpoint obtains the compressed data to use for the message
payload as follows.
The endpoint compresses "Hello" into one compressed DEFLATE block and
flushes the resulting data into a byte array using an empty DEFLATE
block with no compression:
0xf2 0x48 0xcd 0xc9 0xc9 0x07 0x00 0x00 0x00 0xff 0xff
By stripping 0x00 0x00 0xff 0xff from the tail end, the endpoint gets
the data to use for the message payload:
0xf2 0x48 0xcd 0xc9 0xc9 0x07 0x00
Suppose that the endpoint sends this compressed message without
fragmentation. The endpoint builds one frame by putting all of the
compressed data in the payload data portion of the frame:
0xc1 0x07 0xf2 0x48 0xcd 0xc9 0xc9 0x07 0x00
The first 2 octets (0xc1 0x07) are the WebSocket frame header (FIN=1,
RSV1=1, RSV2=0, RSV3=0, opcode=text, MASK=0, Payload length=7). The
following figure shows what value is set in each field of the
WebSocket frame header.
0 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
+-+-+-+-+-------+-+-------------+
|F|R|R|R| opcode|M| Payload len |
|I|S|S|S| |A| |
|N|V|V|V| |S| |
| |1|2|3| |K| |
+-+-+-+-+-------+-+-------------+
|1|1|0|0| 1 |0| 7 |
+-+-+-+-+-------+-+-------------+
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 22]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
Suppose that the endpoint sends the compressed message with
fragmentation. The endpoint splits the compressed data into
fragments and builds frames for each fragment. For example, if the
fragments are 3 and 4 octets, the first frame is:
0x41 0x03 0xf2 0x48 0xcd
and the second frame is:
0x80 0x04 0xc9 0xc9 0x07 0x00
Note that the RSV1 bit is set only on the first frame.
7.2.3.2. Sharing LZ77 Sliding Window
Suppose that a client has sent a message "Hello" as a compressed
message and will send the same message "Hello" again as a compressed
message.
0xf2 0x48 0xcd 0xc9 0xc9 0x07 0x00
The above is the payload of the first message that the client has
sent. If the "agreed parameters" contain the
"client_no_context_takeover" extension parameter, the client
compresses the payload of the next message into the same bytes (if
the client uses the same "BTYPE" value and "BFINAL" value). So, the
payload of the second message will be:
0xf2 0x48 0xcd 0xc9 0xc9 0x07 0x00
If the "agreed parameters" did not contain the
"client_no_context_takeover" extension parameter, the client can
compress the payload of the next message into fewer bytes by
referencing the history in the LZ77 sliding window. So, the payload
of the second message will be:
0xf2 0x00 0x11 0x00 0x00
So, 2 bytes are saved in total.
Note that even if some uncompressed messages (with the RSV1 bit
unset) are inserted between the two "Hello" messages, they don't
affect the LZ77 sliding window.
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 23]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
7.2.3.3. Using a DEFLATE Block with No Compression
A DEFLATE block with no compression may be used.
0xc1 0x0b 0x00 0x05 0x00 0xfa 0xff 0x48 0x65 0x6c 0x6c 0x6f 0x00
This is a frame constituting a text message "Hello" built using a
DEFLATE block with no compression. The first 2 octets (0xc1 0x0b)
are the WebSocket frame header (FIN=1, RSV1=1, RSV2=0, RSV3=0,
opcode=text, MASK=0, Payload length=7). Note that the RSV1 bit is
set for this message (only on the first fragment if the message is
fragmented) because the RSV1 bit is set when DEFLATE is applied to
the message, including the case when only DEFLATE blocks with no
compression are used. The 3rd to 13th octets consist of the payload
data containing "Hello" compressed using a DEFLATE block with no
compression.
7.2.3.4. Using a DEFLATE Block with "BFINAL" Set to 1
On platforms on which the flush method using an empty DEFLATE block
with no compression is not available, implementors can choose to
flush data using DEFLATE blocks with "BFINAL" set to 1.
0xf3 0x48 0xcd 0xc9 0xc9 0x07 0x00 0x00
This is the payload of a message containing "Hello" compressed using
a DEFLATE block with "BFINAL" set to 1. The first 7 octets
constitute a DEFLATE block with "BFINAL" set to 1 and "BTYPE" set to
01 containing "Hello". The last 1 octet (0x00) contains the header
bits with "BFINAL" set to 0 and "BTYPE" set to 00, and 5 padding bits
of 0. This octet is necessary to allow the payload to be
decompressed in the same manner as messages flushed using DEFLATE
blocks with "BFINAL" unset.
7.2.3.5. Two DEFLATE Blocks in One Message
Two or more DEFLATE blocks may be used in one message.
0xf2 0x48 0x05 0x00 0x00 0x00 0xff 0xff 0xca 0xc9 0xc9 0x07 0x00
The first 3 octets (0xf2 0x48 0x05) and the least significant two
bits of the 4th octet (0x00) constitute one DEFLATE block with
"BFINAL" set to 0 and "BTYPE" set to 01 containing "He". The rest of
the 4th octet contains the header bits with "BFINAL" set to 0 and
"BTYPE" set to 00, and the 3 padding bits of 0. Together with the
following 4 octets (0x00 0x00 0xff 0xff), the header bits constitute
an empty DEFLATE block with no compression. A DEFLATE block
containing "llo" follows the empty DEFLATE block.
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 24]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
7.2.3.6. Generating an Empty Fragment
Suppose that an endpoint is sending data of unknown size. The
endpoint may encounter the end-of-data signal from the data source
when its buffer for uncompressed data is empty. In such a case, the
endpoint just needs to send the last fragment with the FIN bit set to
1 and the payload set to the DEFLATE block(s), which contains 0 bytes
of data. If the compression library being used doesn't generate any
data when its buffer is empty, an empty uncompressed DEFLATE block
can be built and used for this purpose as follows:
0x00
The single octet 0x00 contains the header bits with "BFINAL" set to 0
and "BTYPE" set to 00, and 5 padding bits of 0.
7.3. Implementation Notes
On most common software development platforms, the DEFLATE
compression library provides a method for aligning compressed data to
byte boundaries using an empty DEFLATE block with no compression.
For example, zlib [zlib] does this when "Z_SYNC_FLUSH" is passed to
the deflate function.
Some platforms may only provide methods to output and process
compressed data with a zlib header and an Adler-32 checksum. On such
platforms, developers need to write stub code to remove and
complement the zlib and Adler-32 checksum by themselves.
To obtain a useful compression ratio, an LZ77 sliding window size of
1,024 or more is RECOMMENDED.
If a side disallows context takeover, its endpoint can easily figure
out whether or not a certain message will be shorter if compressed.
Otherwise, it's not easy to know whether future messages will benefit
from having a certain message compressed. Implementors may employ
some heuristics to determine this.
8. Security Considerations
There is a known exploit when history-based compression is combined
with a secure transport [CRIME]. Implementors should pay attention
to this point when integrating this extension with other extensions
or protocols.
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 25]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
9. IANA Considerations
9.1. Registration of the "permessage-deflate" WebSocket Extension Name
IANA has registered the following WebSocket extension name in the
"WebSocket Extension Name Registry" defined in [RFC6455].
Extension Identifier
permessage-deflate
Extension Common Name
WebSocket Per-Message Deflate
Extension Definition
This document.
Known Incompatible Extensions
None
The "permessage-deflate" extension name is used in the "Sec-
WebSocket-Extensions" header in the WebSocket opening handshake to
negotiate use of the "permessage-deflate" extension.
9.2. Registration of the "Per-Message Compressed" WebSocket Framing
Header Bit
IANA has registered the following WebSocket framing header bit in the
"WebSocket Framing Header Bits Registry" defined in [RFC6455].
Value
RSV1
Description
The "Per-Message Compressed" bit, which indicates whether or not
the message is compressed. RSV1 is set for compressed messages
and unset for uncompressed messages.
Reference
Section 6 of this document.
The "Per-Message Compressed" framing header bit is used on the first
fragment of data messages to indicate whether the payload of the
message is compressed by the PMCE or not.
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 26]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
10. References
10.1. Normative References
[CRIME] Rizzo, J. and T. Duong, "The CRIME attack", EKOparty
Security Conference, September 2012.
[LZ77] Ziv, J. and A. Lempel, "A Universal Algorithm for
Sequential Data Compression", IEEE Transactions on
Information Theory, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 337-343,
DOI 10.1109/TIT.1977.1055714, May 1977,
<https://www.cs.duke.edu/courses/spring03/cps296.5/papers/
ziv_lempel_1977_universal_algorithm.pdf>.
[RFC1951] Deutsch, P., "DEFLATE Compressed Data Format Specification
version 1.3", RFC 1951, DOI 10.17487/RFC1951, May 1996,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1951>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC5234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5234, January 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5234>.
[RFC6455] Fette, I. and A. Melnikov, "The WebSocket Protocol",
RFC 6455, DOI 10.17487/RFC6455, December 2011,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6455>.
10.2. Informative References
[RFC1979] Woods, J., "PPP Deflate Protocol", RFC 1979,
DOI 10.17487/RFC1979, August 1996,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1979>.
[zlib] Gailly, J. and M. Adler, "zlib", <http://www.zlib.net/>.
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 27]
RFC 7692 Compression Extensions for WebSocket December 2015
Acknowledgements
Special thanks to Patrick McManus who wrote up the initial
specification of a DEFLATE-based compression extension for the
WebSocket Protocol, which I referred to when writing this
specification.
Thanks to the following people who participated in discussions on the
HyBi WG and contributed ideas and/or provided detailed reviews (the
list is likely incomplete): Adam Rice, Alexander Philippou, Alexey
Melnikov, Arman Djusupov, Bjoern Hoehrmann, Brian McKelvey, Dario
Crivelli, Greg Wilkins, Inaki Baz Castillo, Jamie Lokier, Joakim
Erdfelt, John A. Tamplin, Julian Reschke, Kenichi Ishibashi, Mark
Nottingham, Peter Thorson, Roberto Peon, Salvatore Loreto, Simone
Bordet, Tobias Oberstein, and Yutaka Hirano. Note that the people
listed above didn't necessarily endorse the end result of this work.
Author's Address
Takeshi Yoshino
Google, Inc.
Email: tyoshino@google.com
Yoshino Standards Track [Page 28]