Menu
▾
▴
#123 Websocket support
Given all the connection modes that Syncterm already supports, websocket would be super useful. I've been playing with creating some terminal servers on websocket. IcyTerm has websocket as a connection type option, but doesn't actually use the path data of an address. So currently I've been using syncterm but have to use another program under a shell to handle the actual connection.
Discussion
Anonymous
Didn't realize I wasn't signed in when I submitted this and it submitted as Anon
Last edit: Kostie Muirhead 2026-03-02
I'm not actually sure what the point of websocket (a way to establish a bidirectional message-based communication channel over a bidirectional streaming communication channel) is for inherently streaming data, but if there's a public BBS that supports it that I can test the implementation against, it's certainly doable.
This is also the place to describe why it would be useful/awesome/etc so I prioritize it higher. The work itself doesn't look that hard, aside from things like
HTTP CONNECTand maybe some of the security extensions, which I don't expect I would bother with, so something that convinces me that it would be fun to work on would make it more likely for me to pick up when I'm bored.I don't think there's anything superior about the resulting TCP connection itself, but the main appeal is the reuse of an existing HTTP request on upgrade. This means the original connection is HTTP and works behind common homelab proxy servers like HA-proxy with very little setup. It also means the domain and path data can be used to route connections to multiple BBS/Terminal services without having to deal with opening or forwarding multiple ports or end users having to keep any of that straight.
I do have a BBS package I've been writing that utilizes websockets fairly heavily as one connection type. Maybe I'll come bump this post again in a couple weeks when I have my board converted over to the new package and consistently "up."
Last edit: Kostie Muirhead 2026-03-03