IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Webtransport] Confirming Consensus on WebTransport protocols

Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com> Wed, 13 January 2021 15:41 UTC

Return-Path: <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: webtransport@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: webtransport@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43C893A114D for <webtransport@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 07:41:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6L7Gg4ZcWYvJ for <webtransport@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 07:41:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pj1-x1035.google.com (mail-pj1-x1035.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1035]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B0EF3A0E60 for <webtransport@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 07:41:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pj1-x1035.google.com with SMTP id md11so1387476pjb.0 for <webtransport@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 07:41:01 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:date:message-id :references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=DapYQ1/LnHsuBaHsar4/65vZGXlPtYjRJHMc+02hI+k=; b=EBMLSlrKY+mDqgWNbwf9te8fvr9kxbAya207NSg7Uacv/C8pL8UFn2Cj0Y1+3kDPmr y2NGZzRkkHQ7enDeQ4zTFojDN8ilC/049M1O9rC4bGj5KpVANT+Mc6nq+lszjyZUD+Mr c8D9RWUcwRYP4qpBgP63E2GAng+5Ke1v07DUqftLeIMUCIVUPwXUzgq+YGlXLNhLxSh1 /3QuZYjTTqK4lAykrsT6IQtvKcghZMlM2gd7ct4xrB/ms0wU5eQrmrtuX3gI06AMsspj /c2mBcK+r8AafeEV69I8KCPM5k3h66eA7kGvUjrJnM6QpwPbhd472QsGmsDnYGTGnOjP 8LrQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=DapYQ1/LnHsuBaHsar4/65vZGXlPtYjRJHMc+02hI+k=; b=YkNC3atcxbLbBlMKHZpcSD86FhjvJVvLZ2648FU9MnXuSxJJvqftiuizrgW0gKLmT0 /TcRPyaZJV0oWr0wGwcGBmq+RAcG9UW2CsVIS2qO1nbj1Sbi20/pt6yaVrWa57cKECZB p2cIAPxwip99yrUbBusklNkwiBljKJtAUDtJFAqgxtagV3DomRZ9VvsjvjrgfHWvywYu ED5pH71MsFdgPdZajOxa70y65W3kdwYeS9Zv0T1kfuhJ9idR3ORe9GH1yt+7sXvyRW7Q 6k6N5GShQTkyMy2gUvaMkWxJpnVG2U7o+tDqI+2BsZh+jyKjXf8BGD999zD5Ki8GfwFd T1Bg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530OaimrZL/We8pZo3xOqbpH3LIQvTpjav9uGY9VyTYOn79BClOr wlzvAwLRDxkpPXvICKCSp+M=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzy6fPbOVORjivyoS7kxGEBVm8DIdLQSVgkz06hrFkyFu+l3ki/l84G/tsxgr9eE4T+6jWqBQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:e88:: with SMTP id fv8mr1542759pjb.126.1610552460716; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 07:41:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2600:380:7068:497f:39d6:1be0:5545:da89? ([2600:380:7068:497f:39d6:1be0:5545:da89]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y15sm3192122pju.13.2021.01.13.07.40.58 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 13 Jan 2021 07:41:00 -0800 (PST)
From: Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>
X-Google-Original-From: Bernard Aboba <Bernard.Aboba@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2021 07:31:50 -0800
Message-Id: <E130A268-3E30-4C3C-A284-8D9731F968AC@gmail.com>
References: <87e320c4-7c8c-47f0-95bb-6c2b2aa8d6cf@www.fastmail.com>
Cc: WebTransport <webtransport@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <87e320c4-7c8c-47f0-95bb-6c2b2aa8d6cf@www.fastmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (18C66)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/webtransport/9zJFMBQ_JFGqYqgBNj-lrTD_LfU>
Subject: Re: [Webtransport] Confirming Consensus on WebTransport protocols
X-BeenThere: webtransport@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <webtransport.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/webtransport>, <mailto:webtransport-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/webtransport/>
List-Post: <mailto:webtransport@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:webtransport-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webtransport>, <mailto:webtransport-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2021 15:41:04 -0000

lOn Jan 13, 2021, at 2:23 AM, Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net> wrote:
> 
> I am was suggesting something different.  This working group should not express an opinion on these matters.  If implementations are willing to engage with these problems, they should be free to do so without some RFC (or Internet-Draft) saying that they should not.  

[BA] I don’t recall a suggestion to prohibit pooling outright. We discussed API changes to allow an application to request that a WebTransport not be pooled, as well as a server indication to say “I do not support pooling”.  Both of these seem achievable.


> If we identify constraints based on the web security model, that might be cause for a browser not to attempt pooling.  

[BA] That is the crux of Issue 128. Investigating the constraints seems useful.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email