Re: resourceTiming.nextHopProtocol reports"hq" - is that ok?

My pleasure! FWIW, the Chrome change has landed and should be live in the
next Chrome Canary release.

On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 5:30 PM, Lucas Pardue <Lucas.Pardue@bbc.co.uk>
wrote:

> Ryan,
>
> Thanks for being so responsive to this issue. Looking forward to testing
> some future version of Chrome.
>
> Kind regards
> Lucas
> ________________________________________
> From: Ryan Hamilton [rch@google.com]
> Sent: 14 March 2018 22:57
> To: Martin Thomson
> Cc: Amos Jeffries; HTTP Working Group
> Subject: Re: resourceTiming.nextHopProtocol reports"hq" - is that ok?
>
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 1:05 AM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com<
> mailto:martin.thomson@gmail.com>> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:46 AM, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz
> <mailto:squid3@treenet.co.nz>> wrote:
> > On 13/03/18 16:56, Ryan Hamilton wrote:
> > For informing the recipient of any additional versions of QUIC which the
> > sender supports. At present it could be referring to older Drafts which
> > are still supported (but not preferred), and after RFC publication to
> > different versions of the "hq" protocol (if any).
>
> Everything Amos said here.  Remember that there are two versions in
> play here: QUIC and HTTP over QUIC.  And using "hq" camps on a value
> we intend to use.  If Google are indeed using it, then it might
> already be unrecoverable, but that depends on how thoroughly it can be
> removed.
>
> If this use of "hq" continues - even in part - then we'll have to pick
> a different value for HTTP over QUIC.
>
> The actual ALPN that Google QUIC uses is unlikely to matter in the
> long term, but I would use hq-00, even if it has diverged from that
> since the -00 drafts went out.
>
> ​As discussed in-person, the current use of "hq" by Google shouldn't cause
> long term harm because it's used in conjunction with a quic​= list that
> only includes google QUIC versions.
>
> That being said, I'm happy to change this. We've disabled the experiment
> in Chrome which thinks in understands "hq" in an Alt-Svc advertisement and
> we'll also disable the server-side announcement. In addition, I've updated
> the w3c issue about nextHopProtocol https://github.com/w3c/
> navigation-timing/issues/71 and have sent off a Chrome code review
> https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/963492 to
> change the resource timings API output which kicked off this thread.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ryan
>
>