Hasura connection error is not reported correctly

[lovasoa]

Screenshot

Reproduction

Connecting to a hasura graphql server with a jwt that does not contain the x-hasura-default-role claim.

Expected Behaviour
The error returned by hasura is properly forwarded to the user.

Hasura returns {"type":"connection_error","payload":"JWT claim does not contain x-hasura-default-role"}

The error message returned by the library should contain the string JWT claim does not contain x-hasura-default-role

Actual Behaviour
but instead the library threw the following error :

 Error: Invalid message 'type' property "connection_error"
    validateMessage common.mjs:142
    parseMessage common.mjs:168
    onmessage client.mjs:214
    connecting client.mjs:212
    connecting client.mjs:256

[enisdenjo]

There is no connection_error message type in the GraphQL over WebSocket spec.

This is a problem with Hasura, please open an issue there.

[lovasoa]

Even if hasura changes that in the future, there are tens of thousands of deployed instances in the wild with that behavior. Hasura is quite popular. Are you sure you don't want to add support for this connection_error key, even if it's not in the standard ?

And if not, maybe we could at least change the error message to something that would include the original message. That would already help a lot. Maybe : The following message was received: {"type":"connection_error","payload":"JWT claim does not contain x-hasura-default-role"}, but it could not be decoded because the type "connection_error" is invalid.

[lovasoa]

Looking at the link you sent, it looks like the specification is your own, isn't it ? Is there a standards body involved ? If not, isn't the easiest solution to just add connection_error to your own PROTOCOL.md ?

[enisdenjo]

Are you sure you don't want to add support for this connection_error key, even if it's not in the standard ?

Yes. Standards should not adapt to implementations, it should be the other way around.

Furthermore, there's a good reason for not having the connection_error - I explained a while ago on the same issue you referenced in Hasura: #112 (comment).

[...] there are tens of thousands of deployed instances in the wild with that behavior.

There's also tens of thousands instances of other services and projects that don't use the the connection_error and comply with the spec.

Looking at the link you sent, it looks like the specification is your own, isn't it ? Is there a standards body involved ?

Yes. The official GraphQL over HTTP work group. Also see the RFC there.