Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Consider renaming or replacing http3only? #1744

Closed
ekinnear opened this issue Apr 5, 2024 · 1 comment · Fixed by #1745
Closed

Consider renaming or replacing http3only? #1744

ekinnear opened this issue Apr 5, 2024 · 1 comment · Fixed by #1745

Comments

@ekinnear
Copy link

ekinnear commented Apr 5, 2024

What is the issue with the Fetch Standard?

In the context of WebTransport, the use of the term http3only in obtain a connection came up in discussion of w3c/webtransport#561.

We've been trying to adhere to more transport agnostic principles, allowing developers to express their needs based on properties of the transport, rather than hardcoding a particular protocol or a version of a protocol.

In that context, the reason for requiring http3only was determined to instead represent the desire to obtain unreliable transport that can eliminate head-of-line blocking, perhaps we should use some spelling of the term requireUnreliableTransport.

Filing an issue to discuss if we want to transition to something more transport agnostic in fetch as well when obtaining connections. What happens when we have HTTP/4? HTTP/3.1? What if HTTP/3.1 doesn't provide the same underlying transport properties? It seems like enshrining the protocol version itself as the name of the field leaves us in an undesirable position.

annevk added a commit that referenced this issue Apr 5, 2024
This should be more future proof.

Fixes #1744.
@annevk
Copy link
Member

annevk commented Apr 5, 2024

That makes a lot of sense. I created #1745.

annevk added a commit that referenced this issue May 2, 2024
This should be more future proof. Also tidy up the language a bit.

Fixes #1744.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants