[Privacy-pass] Re: Whether to advance the Extensions and Public Metadata drafts

[Christopher Wood <[e-mail]>]

@David and Thibault: can you say what extension you’re using? Is it the expiration extension? Something else?

I am concerned about pushing a draft that has no concrete well-defined use case. If anything, I’d like to at least advance the expiration extension so we have documented evidence that the extension mechanism works as intended.

Best,
Chris

> On Apr 24, 2026, at 7:46 PM, David Schinazi <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> +1 to what Thibault said. Google is also interested in seeing this work published, as we use it in production.
> 
> David
> 
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2026 at 9:19 AM Thibault Meunier <ot-ietf=[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>> 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=[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> 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 mailing list -- [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> -- 
> Privacy-pass mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]