I'm quite excited to see this ready to ship, thanks for the work you've put
into it over the years.
Both Mozilla and Apple's positions seem dependent upon analysis of the
underlying Privacy Pass protocol. Have you had additional communication
with them about how things are going, since it's bee
On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 1:32 AM Chris Thompson wrote:
> On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 3:36 AM Mike West wrote:
>
>> I am enthusiastic about this (and not just because it should allow us to
>> deprecate/remove `Upgrade-Insecure-Requests`). A few comments inline:
>>
>> On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 1:13 AM Ch
-mike
On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 4:17 PM Rick Byers wrote:
> As a long-time user of HTTPS-first mode, I'm excited to see this ship ASAP!
>
> On Wed, May 31, 2023, 5:29 a.m. 'Mike West' via blink-dev <
> blink-dev@chromium.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, May 26
I'm excited to see this! One question inline about timelines:
On Thursday, August 11, 2022 at 9:55:48 PM UTC+2 David Benjamin wrote:
> Contact emailsdavi...@chromium.org, dad...@google.com
>
> ExplainerNone
>
> Specificationhttps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tls-esni
>
> Summary
>
>
Friendly ping to Yoav's question. I would also like to see some sort of
hook in the spec that made this mechanism explicit. I think this is a
reasonable change to ship, I just want to ensure we lock in reasonable
behavior at the spec level. Is that something y'all can take care of?
Thanks!
-mike
LGTM3. I'm particularly happy with the way this evolved after excellent
feedback from our colleagues in the TAG. Thank you!
-mike
On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 7:04 PM Chris Harrelson
wrote:
> LGTM2
>
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 1:14 AM Yoav Weiss wrote:
>
>> LGTM1
>>
>> This seems like a useful API,
Hey Alex! Thanks for your feedback (and LGTM :) )!
On documentation: we have a PR up against Fetch at
https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/pull/1840 which aims to clarify the timing
and web-facing impact of a blocking decision, and the list of affected
domains is up at
https://github.com/GoogleChrome/i
