W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > March 2017

Re: Identity mechanism at risk?

From: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 20:35:22 -0600
Cc: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Message-Id: <4FD387F3-48D7-462A-97D2-0488A1FB4269@iii.ca>
To: Dominique Hazaƫl-Massieux <dom@w3.org>

The security of WebRTC is very weak without this, so the draft is certainly not ready for CR if this part is not ready for CR. 


> On Mar 14, 2017, at 3:35 AM, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> As we are getting closer to clearing our issue lists for webrtc-pc and
> thus hopefully moving to Candidate Recommendation soon, and looking at
> the overall rough implementation status of the spec, it strikes me that
> at the moment the identity mechanism of the spec is one part for which I
> have very little clarity on implementations plan beyond Firefox.
> 
> 
> Given that part of the CR process is to demonstrate that each of the
> feature in the spec will be getting two independent implementations, I'm
> wondering how likely we feel we will achieve this for that part of the spec.
> 
> In particular, if our current impression is that it is unlikely, it
> might be useful to mark it at risk [1] - beyond the small process
> efficiency it gives (not needing to go back to CR to remove it from the
> spec if we can't demonstrate interop), I think it would also serve as a
> useful way to draw attention to the community that they may voice their
> concerns one way or the other on the lack of adoption of this.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> (I've raised https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/1074 to track this)
> 
> Dom
> 
> 1. https://www.w3.org/2017/Process-20170301/#candidate-rec
> 
Received on Friday, 17 March 2017 02:35:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:50 UTC