[blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport serverCertificateHashes option

Contact emails yhir...@chromium.org, vasi...@chromium.org Explainer https://github.com/w3c/webtransport/blob/main/explainer.md Spec https://w3c.github.io/webtransport/#dom-webtransportoptions-servercertificatehashes WebTransport has been already covered by a series of TAG reviews (389

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

> I'll also note that the TAG just put this on their agenda for this coming week. If concerns are raised there, I would appreciate us addressing them thoroughly before shipping. The week of 2021-10-11 ended but we haven't heard anything from them. I'm planning to land the change. On Tue, Oct 12,

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

Thank you! We'll land the shipping CL after addressing TAG review comments. On Sat, Oct 9, 2021 at 1:07 AM Rick Byers wrote: > LGTM3 > > It's exciting to see this shipping! Lack of datagram networking has been a > hole in the pl

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

LGTM3 It's exciting to see this shipping! Lack of datagram networking has been a hole in the platform for a long time. On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 1:18 AM Yoav Weiss wrote: > *LGTM2* to ship without certificate fingerprints. It'd be great to ensure > public documentation for this includes the fall

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

*LGTM2* to ship without certificate fingerprints. It'd be great to ensure public documentation for this includes the fallback mechanism we want developers to implement. (both in the web.dev article and future MDN documentation). On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 9:19 PM Mike West wrote: > LGTM1, to ship th

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

LGTM1, to ship this without the certificate fingerprint portion of 349 discussed above. There's still some conversation to be had there, and I think it's worth finishing the discussion before shipping it since it's quite clearly separable. I'd suggest shipping that as a separate intent if that's th

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 5:51 PM Yutaka Hirano wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 5:38 PM Philip Jägenstedt > wrote: > >> On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 10:04 AM Yutaka Hirano >> wrote: >> >>> Thank you! >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 4:45 PM Philip Jägenstedt >>> wrote: >>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 5:38 PM Philip Jägenstedt wrote: > On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 10:04 AM Yutaka Hirano > wrote: > >> Thank you! >> >> On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 4:45 PM Philip Jägenstedt >> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 3:20 PM Yutaka Hirano >>> wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 4, 202

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 10:04 AM Yutaka Hirano wrote: > Thank you! > > On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 4:45 PM Philip Jägenstedt > wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 3:20 PM Yutaka Hirano >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 10:04 PM Philip Jägenstedt >>> wrote: >>> On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 a

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

Thank you! On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 4:45 PM Philip Jägenstedt wrote: > On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 3:20 PM Yutaka Hirano wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 10:04 PM Philip Jägenstedt >> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 9:27 PM Yutaka Hirano >>> wrote: >>> Hi Philip, Sorry fo

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 3:20 PM Yutaka Hirano wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 10:04 PM Philip Jägenstedt > wrote: > >> On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 9:27 PM Yutaka Hirano >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Philip, >>> >>> Sorry for the belated reply. Comments inline: >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 7:31 PM Philip

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

Hi, are there any unanswered questions? Or, do you have more comments or questions? We are open to ship this feature *without* the custom certificate part, which means shipping this feature and continuing discussing issue #349 . Thanks, On Tue, Oct

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 10:04 PM Philip Jägenstedt wrote: > On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 9:27 PM Yutaka Hirano wrote: > >> Hi Philip, >> >> Sorry for the belated reply. Comments inline: >> >> On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 7:31 PM Philip Jägenstedt >> wrote: >> >>> Hi again, >>> >>> I've made a full pass of

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 9:27 PM Yutaka Hirano wrote: > Hi Philip, > > Sorry for the belated reply. Comments inline: > > On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 7:31 PM Philip Jägenstedt > wrote: > >> Hi again, >> >> I've made a full pass of the intent now. I have a lot of questions, but >> am pretty convinced we

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 3:49 PM Yang Guo wrote: > Thank you for thinking about debuggability! I understand the rationale > behind not providing more details. Would it make sense though to link to > chrome://net-export from DevTools' Network Panel? > > Actually after implementing the minimal suppor

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

Thank you for thinking about debuggability! I understand the rationale behind not providing more details. Would it make sense though to link to chrome://net-export from DevTools' Network Panel? On Sunday, October 3, 2021 at 2:32:53 AM UTC+2 Victor Vasiliev wrote: > On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 6:31

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 6:31 AM Philip Jägenstedt wrote: > Our launch process docs > says "You should have > TAG sign-off on your API design by now" but I consider this a bug in the > process docs. The request was sent on Aug 19 and has no feedb

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

Hi Philip, Sorry for the belated reply. Comments inline: On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 7:31 PM Philip Jägenstedt wrote: > Hi again, > > I've made a full pass of the intent now. I have a lot of questions, but am > pretty convinced we should ship this, it's just a matter of what things > need to block

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

Given where things stand with issue 349, perhaps you might consider excluding that from the implementation. It's an extension that can be added later very easily. On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 9:22 PM Mike West wrote: > Like Philip, I think this is a useful mechanism, and I'd like to see it > ship. I

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

Like Philip, I think this is a useful mechanism, and I'd like to see it ship. I'm also happy with the work that's gone into it through now, and thankful that folks have been proactive both in terms of testing and outreach to security and privacy folks. Like Emily, I think questions like https://gi

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

Hi again, I've made a full pass of the intent now. I have a lot of questions, but am pretty convinced we should ship this, it's just a matter of what things need to block that, and what things can be left until later. Comments inline... On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 6:55 AM Yutaka Hirano wrote: > Co

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 9:34 AM Yutaka Hirano wrote: > I think that's covered in the Summary of the intent: > > > This time, we want to ship the core part. The following features are > excluded: > >- > >Connection sharing >- > >Stream Prioritization >- > >Statistics >-

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

I think that's covered in the Summary of the intent: > This time, we want to ship the core part. The following features are excluded: - Connection sharing - Stream Prioritization - Statistics - WebTransport over HTTP/2 So, that is intentional. On Wed, Sep 29, 2021

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 12:32 PM Yutaka Hirano wrote: > Hi Philip, > > On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 6:29 PM Philip Jägenstedt > wrote: > >> Hi Yutaka, >> >> This is a big new feature and a lot to go over. When looking at the >> spec+Blink IDL, I noticed the API didn't require secure contexts: >> http

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

Hi Philip, On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 6:29 PM Philip Jägenstedt wrote: > Hi Yutaka, > > This is a big new feature and a lot to go over. When looking at the > spec+Blink IDL, I noticed the API didn't require secure contexts: > https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1253275 > > It look

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

Hi Yutaka, This is a big new feature and a lot to go over. When looking at the spec+Blink IDL, I noticed the API didn't require secure contexts: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1253275 It looks like that's being fixed now, which is great! I'll reply again when I've spent som

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

I want to note that there are some pretty big open questions in https://github.com/w3c/webtransport/issues/349. I think we might want to have more restrictions on the allowed types of certificates than the spec currently outlines, and introducing those restrictions after shipping the feature would

[blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebTransport

Contact emails yhir...@chromium.org, vasi...@chromium.org Explainer https://github.com/w3c/webtransport/blob/main/explainer.md Specification https://w3c.github.io/webtransport https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-webtrans-http3/ https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-qu