Re: [w3c/ServiceWorker] Add race-network-and-cache source to static routing api. (PR #1764)

youennf left a comment (w3c/ServiceWorker#1764)

I haven't looked at the PR, a few thoughts/questions:
1. How is a web application knowledgeable enough to properly choose cache vs. race-cache-and-network? 
2. A UA can implement race-network-and-cache by using the existing cache route implementation. This approach might actually be useful in some conditions (metered connection e.g.). AFAIUI, the web application will have no way of identifying the UA did an actual race or not.
3. A UA can already start the network load without waiting for the cache. This is a partial race (it cannot use the network response before knowing whether there is a cache entry), but can it solve the perf issue? Should we consider allowing the cache route to be fully raceable with network by default?
4. Are there privacy concerns? For instance, can a web application infer, from the selected route, new information (slow hard drive vs. networking)? Does this reveal new HW/config information? Could this be used by two pages running on the device as a side-information channel (one using intensively hard drive for instance, and the other one checking whether network or cache is used)?


-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/ServiceWorker/pull/1764#issuecomment-3851729981
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3c/ServiceWorker/pull/1764/c3851729981@github.com>