[Privacy-pass] Re: Whether to advance the Extensions and Public Metadata drafts
Thibault Meunier <ot-ietf@thibault.uk> Thu, 23 April 2026 16:19 UTC
Return-Path: <ot-ietf@thibault.uk>
X-Original-To: privacy-pass@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: privacy-pass@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 336EFE1D1F04 for <privacy-pass@mail2.ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Apr 2026 09:19:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1776961195; bh=4B19oV0lXnWBr5zYyQe05G3kK/QxBfv/O06e50/euEk=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=dd/gZF8hWxblNnyexo86VT7F33D3Eakau7OYa5kJQuxA4jMVqScOHlsJhSj6uEbkB nWQ7p9A8Q6qACfESk2NcsHtRaUP5G3Pw84tdeyDTgkWXcEIpAHEqyIYHYhp993LX1G oDLw6TqnMfT0a6DvHTrTluNdwmA3z7TxiAAP/2DA=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.797
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.797 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=thibault.uk
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UxMRn-w1WPxM for <privacy-pass@mail2.ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Apr 2026 09:19:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-4323.protonmail.ch (mail-4323.protonmail.ch [185.70.43.23]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D74E2E1D1EEA for <privacy-pass@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Apr 2026 09:19:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=thibault.uk; s=protonmail; t=1776961186; x=1777220386; bh=bu9iHGWhFjfIbBNvtnSTeaZeP/qFZl4zNR9z5b+2ekU=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: Message-ID:BIMI-Selector; b=JDEPNyjXTpaO00IJYdZ2kyZLFy13RUzEdPbtEowje1u5F2lM9lnTJ2HAVV/+jAzY7 NiqQrPue3RGoOfFEx22JmccWt/jhYIfXVkJaOZP54XIx3lkoCtwaG4doTED11JrGCo FdMhhodAy2v7OYhTevzOMvHEfaFfarNYrOTAzSLvGIaafsGfv3BQodAfJKH4/sJHvO JEiW9RC/FqdP7D4TuPAZD2fXSDz8IEONaZepeCEB78Y6ioarng6wO72/LO/3xSNTVn lxyDwxHvoIdv1VYAD/GzQklfNUJO9twqTv4i9umZL9WWNgWCCfigE7BK5hKqyP8M3h wypkhCL2AneGQ==
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2026 16:19:41 +0000
To: Ben Schwartz <bemasc=40meta.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
From: Thibault Meunier <ot-ietf@thibault.uk>
Message-ID: <jRSwS0LSbPZKpIvcFDEiH7T_jQ66oexvPkm904WewGiIOez3LNhOVBeW1I3pTewpHDoV0pkId6NasaYOzXDuD7ntvwIlQ4KzbOI5-AwGvkE=@thibault.uk>
In-Reply-To: <CAOdQrVPHbzTmne9T9iQKChROtdEt2KAigyiLNEuQPZ=h=yiA=A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAOdQrVPHbzTmne9T9iQKChROtdEt2KAigyiLNEuQPZ=h=yiA=A@mail.gmail.com>
Feedback-ID: 60844204:user:proton
X-Pm-Message-ID: fd0351ae939006dc16e7e797b39ba85e11ea50e8
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID-Hash: JSGELG7H2MEICX4Q7W6OC36DFA2SVMU3
X-Message-ID-Hash: JSGELG7H2MEICX4Q7W6OC36DFA2SVMU3
X-MailFrom: ot-ietf@thibault.uk
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: privacy-pass@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [Privacy-pass] Re: Whether to advance the Extensions and Public Metadata drafts
List-Id: Privacy Pass Protocol <privacy-pass.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/privacy-pass/UXASxWWPVg458ljhItEuhHNUGko>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/privacy-pass>
List-Help: <mailto:privacy-pass-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:privacy-pass-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:privacy-pass@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:privacy-pass-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:privacy-pass-leave@ietf.org>
Hi, It seems the comments from last year for draft-ietf-privacypass-auth-scheme-extensions have been addressed on GitHub [3]. The draft did not made it to the datatracker for what I see though [4]. For draft-ietf-privacypass-public-metadata-issuance, no update has been made. So the nits that Tommy pointed out [5] about reference that needs to be updated to match RFCs and the fixed IANA values are still relevant. >From implementation and production side, it's been stable on Cloudflare side during that time. There are implementation of the protocol in TypeScript [1], and in Rust - for which an early implementation [2] as been made public. An implementation of the current revision of the drafts is actively used by Cloudflare in a production environment. The perspective has not changed, and I think the documents are worth advancing to publication. The stability also reinforces that sentiment in my opinion. [1] https://github.com/cloudflare/privacypass-ts/ [2] https://github.com/raphaelrobert/privacypass/pull/25 [3] https://github.com/ietf-wg-privacypass/draft-ietf-privacypass-auth-scheme-extensions [4] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-privacypass-auth-scheme-extensions/history/ [5] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/privacy-pass/xQDO-BYcYPUx-Y_hZ6PY0m-gA8Y/ Best, Thibault On Thursday, April 9th, 2026 at 23:13, Ben Schwartz <bemasc=40meta.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > Hi PRIVACYPASS, > > > > The working group currently has two drafts that have completed working group last call: > > > > 1. draft-ietf-privacypass-auth-scheme-extensions > > 2. draft-ietf-privacypass-public-metadata-issuance > > > > > The working group’s exchanges during the last call in June 2025 [1] indicated significant interest in these drafts. However, perspectives may have changed in the intervening months due to new technical directions and changes in business priorities. It is the chairs’ impression that the authors are no longer strongly interested in advancing these documents to publication. > > > > If you believe that these documents are worth advancing to publication, please reply in this thread. If the chairs do not see sufficient support, we will let these documents expire in their current state. > > > > Regards, > > Ben Schwartz, for the chairs > > > > [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/privacy-pass/gHd1ItmVhpa2C9K-QECZMq1uIcI/
- [Privacy-pass] Whether to advance the Extensions … Ben Schwartz
- [Privacy-pass] Re: Whether to advance the Extensi… Thibault Meunier
- [Privacy-pass] Re: Whether to advance the Extensi… David Schinazi
- [Privacy-pass] Re: Whether to advance the Extensi… Christopher Wood
- [Privacy-pass] Re: Whether to advance the Extensi… David Schinazi
- [Privacy-pass] Re: Whether to advance the Extensi… Christopher Wood
- [Privacy-pass] Re: Whether to advance the Extensi… David Schinazi
- [Privacy-pass] Re: Whether to advance the Extensi… Ben Schwartz
- [Privacy-pass] Re: Whether to advance the Extensi… David Schinazi
- [Privacy-pass] Re: Whether to advance the Extensi… Christopher Wood