Re: [dispatch] Re-dispatching Web Packaging

Mark Nottingham <> Mon, 18 February 2019 00:43 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BB4D12F18C for <>; Sun, 17 Feb 2019 16:43:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.b=KcCOSc43; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.b=juSaRFQH
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7qVJhjy83xSa for <>; Sun, 17 Feb 2019 16:43:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B2D7212D7F8 for <>; Sun, 17 Feb 2019 16:43:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal []) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71A95230D; Sun, 17 Feb 2019 19:43:28 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 17 Feb 2019 19:43:28 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm2; bh=2 Lvd0WfSNbByQ1IJ/v63ZaE/FC/jrtVM31m+9OZavFc=; b=KcCOSc43lxGEffA+O uqOeiD0SKg1FtjsiBYqmi00ZD7ulA9yQ71MCJphgGvETbVeVOHoJD1I+07PZYYt2 E479IouL4FK+PBvGUY3KHOIUBmsUvDS3st9knE1es0q1UgdrZ9rDlonVU8Ox6yTh tz5K7ieJKfJtGsDyi8WPB1o081RM5SevHAcrjtOoxzLwt8ahhfyLhqgOnYqSs/vq +Nrs7wmEQvpie0F+ssbMeBQGY2fNhRmoaOssxOYw9YzITLZwRE5YGt99WSq6Nr0Y 5Cw0HpFy+Kflxabm0prf8H0H+G7PVR9wTdpKGI8dBxOooDmUJVlfNiNNMl3D4EGs cnLzQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=2Lvd0WfSNbByQ1IJ/v63ZaE/FC/jrtVM31m+9OZav Fc=; b=juSaRFQHc6QSai+a6vFFr0JZgCHpyaTS1qSyFq3hzlnUJtbh5VTsUeHu1 CaugWGJVmjUmVJOP9zMpZrGkhvC5Nn+tN26TEp7OtBuOcO41o5FyQVGMirWSn8oH jxn/Ybz8SyulPp/gHYSwLgPJNwfs/zHRleOvapA9hm1dl8rww9RjnoQuqjLIv4ld leDAa/SjTkIHQc7cFtqZZneXZoPFmvxbuisRR4WddluC4QXUo7ti5tgcAza876mt 43hEDFoePAF/1MTIZ+gcwuHyBNVJU+8naFscekEeixS/FCmWNh8GJRf1oZN3mR// E4NR/h+IkJfpnLIxkTuYfSxlFgMWQ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:r_9pXJUGT_EvZBRDXg_mh4b4KzgfIAsUY-Bem4pyZb7O7IElgx1JGA>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedtledrudduvddgvdekucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfquhhtnecuuegrihhlohhuthemucef tddtnecuogfuuhhsphgvtghtffhomhgrihhnucdlgeelmdenucfjughrpegtggfuhfgjff fgkfhfvffosehtqhhmtdhhtddvnecuhfhrohhmpeforghrkhcupfhothhtihhnghhhrghm uceomhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnhgvtheqnecuffhomhgrihhnpehgohhoghhlvgdrtghomh dpghhithhhuhgsrdhiohdpghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmpdhivghtfhdrohhrghdpmhhnohht rdhnvghtnecukfhppedugeegrddufeeirddujeehrddvkeenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilh hfrhhomhepmhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:r_9pXI3joSoZboLBbf2GtsCY5KxIzcmOgZfyyGXEyD3g8ImQXSJlSw> <xmx:r_9pXIOFub8qcWdortXjQ-IeKhr7bCpj5VnprYgtcZjjUckkjyuffA> <xmx:r_9pXD1ih3sVxsB8NeHQyUOjIAe9Wei0GDunhWE7CxHs3axcnq56pQ> <xmx:sP9pXL2FtBEj_daliHh04RaEe8o-HjcZf7GO9EIGAur08Zr2YPWSIA>
Received: from (unknown []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 32017E41BB; Sun, 17 Feb 2019 19:43:25 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.2 \(3445.102.3\))
From: Mark Nottingham <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 11:43:21 +1100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <>
To: Jeffrey Yasskin <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.102.3)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [dispatch] Re-dispatching Web Packaging
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 00:43:34 -0000

Needless to say, I think this is a good idea.


> On 16 Feb 2019, at 4:30 am, Jeffrey Yasskin <> wrote:
> Hello Dispatch,
> TL;DR: I'd like to request another discussion of Web Packaging at IETF104. We think it'll be ready for a BOF at IETF105, but mnot suggested we take it back here for a second look.
> We dispatched Web Packaging,, at IETF99, with the discussion at On your advice, we split the proposal into two pieces, "signed exchanges", and "bundles". We also created the mailing list, although it hasn't seen as much activity as the github issue tracker.
> The signed exchanges specification is mostly complete, in an IETF draft that specifies the format:, and a WICG draft that specifies how it integrates with Fetch: We've implemented that specification in Chromium, run an origin trial in Chrome, and will be shipping the current version in Chrome 73:
> Despite shipping the current version, we expect standards bodies to make more changes, and we've built in a way to migrate users to new versions of the specification.
> The Bundles specification is very roughly sketched, but we expect to flesh that out and start implementing it in the next few months.
> The W3C TAG recently discussed the state of things at
> Mark Nottingham and a representative of the TAG are organizing an "ESCAPE" conference at a TBD date to help publishers organize their feedback on the proposals. This has been pushed back a couple times, but it sounds like it's more solidly planned for either May or July before IETF105.
> We think we'll be able to write a WG charter that we can discuss in a BOF at IETF105, with the goal of handing control of the specifications to a more formal group. However, mnot suggested that we come back to DISPATCH to see if anyone's sense of the right plan has changed now that we have a little more experience with the proposals.
> Thanks,
> Jeffrey
> _______________________________________________
> dispatch mailing list

Mark Nottingham