Comparison of WebSocket implementations

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.
Question book-new.svg
 This article relies on references to primary sources. Please add references to secondary or tertiary sources. (September 2011)
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (September 2011)
Gnome globe current event.svg
 This article's factual accuracy may be compromised due to out-of-date information. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (March 2013)

The WebSocket protocol is implemented in different web browsers, web servers and run-time environments and libraries acting as clients or servers. The following is a table of different features of notable WebSocket implementations.


Client (library) Server (library) Version compared Protocol (spec) version support Protocol test report License Implementation language/environment API language/environment Text message support Binary message support Message-based API Frame-based API Streaming API input/output Flow-control framework Automatic pongs for pings Automatic heartbeat pings Manual pings/pongs Frame size limit
Lightstreamer[1] Yes Yes 5.1.1
05 Mar 2013		 RFC 6455 [? Report] Both Commercial and Freeware Java JavaScript / .Net / Java / Flash/Flex / iOS / Android / Silverlight / Windows Phone / WinRT Yes No Yes No No/No Yes Yes Yes No data-driven, configurable
Google Chrome 15[2] Yes No 15.0.874.8
12 Sep 2011		 8 (10) complex C++ / WebKit JavaScript / HTML5 Yes No Yes No No/No No Yes No No ≥ 16 MB
(memory-limited?)
Google Chrome 16[2] Yes No 16.0.912
13 Dec 2011		 13 (17/RFC 6455) complex C++ / WebKit JavaScript / HTML5 Yes No Yes No No/No No Yes No No ≥ 16 MB
(memory-limited?)
Mozilla Firefox 7[3] Yes No 7 beta
12 Sep 2011		 8 (10) MPL & GPL & LGPL C++ / Necko JavaScript / HTML5 Yes No Yes No No/No No Yes No No < 16 MB
Mozilla Firefox 11[3] Yes No 11.0
13 Mar 2012		 13 (17/RFC 6455) MPL & GPL & LGPL C++ / Necko JavaScript / HTML5 Yes Yes Yes No No/No No Yes No No < 2 GB
(memory-limited?)
Jetty[4] Yes Yes 7.5.1
9 Sep 2011		 0-13,RFC 6455[5] JUnit Apache 2 & EPL Java / J2SE & Android Java / javax.servlet Yes Yes Yes Yes No/No[6] Yes[7] Yes No Yes 232 tx
263 rx
Resin[8] No Yes 4.026
29 Feb 2012		 RFC 6455 GPL Java / C Java Yes Yes Yes No Yes No Yes No No memory-limited, configurable
Wt (web toolkit)[9] No Yes 3.2.0
30 Nov 2011		 0,7,8,13 (17) [? Report] GPL & commercial C++ / Boost Asio C++ Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes No memory-limited, configurable
Tornado[10] No Yes 2.3 7, 8, 13 (RFC 6455) Apache 2 Python Python Yes Yes Yes Yes [11] No No Yes No Yes[12] 263

Notes [edit]

  1. ^ Lightstreamer Homepage
  2. ^ a b Chromium Homepage
  3. ^ a b Necko Homepage
  4. ^ Jetty Homepage
  5. ^ Server accepts 0-13 & RFC 6455, client sends only RFC 6455.
  6. ^ Frames larger that the buffer are fragmented and passed to the message layer as a stream of smaller frames.
  7. ^ Internal queuing is avoided so that natural TCP/IP backpressure is used for flow control. A slow application consuming messages will eventually block a busy sender.
  8. ^ Caucho Homepage
  9. ^ Homepage
  10. ^ Tornado Homepage
  11. ^ hidden in private methods, but still accessible
  12. ^ requires the use of the frame API
Portal icon IT portal
Portal icon Internet portal
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comparison_of_WebSocket_implementations&oldid=555139172"