New issue
Advanced search Search tips
Note: Color blocks (like █ or █) mean that a user may not be available. Tooltip shows the reason.

Issue 780640 link

Starred by 1 user
Status: Fixed
Owner:
█ y...@yoav.ws
Last visit > 30 days ago
Closed: Jun 2018
Cc:
█ igrigo...@chromum.org
█ mbis...@evequefou.be
panicker@chromium.org
yoavweiss@chromium.org
npm@chromium.org
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 3
Type: Compat



Sign in to add a comment

Spec Compliance: Chromium returns nextHopProtocol values not specified in the ALPN registry

Project Member Reported by rsleevi@chromium.org, Nov 1 2017 
The ALPN registry is at https://www.iana.org/assignments/tls-extensiontype-values/tls-extensiontype-values.xhtml

PerformanceResourceTiming::GetNextHopProtocol() handles generating the response, and it will use alpn_negotiated_protocol if present (and not unknown), or use connection_info if absent.

connection_info stringification is handled in https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/net/http/http_response_info.cc?rcl=8001500f052d3a126e874e3ef154e80fd3c5bd7b&l=461 , and will return values of "http/0.9" and "http/1.0" if HTTP/0.9 or HTTP/1.0 were negotiated ( see https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/net/http/http_stream_parser.cc?rcl=cbd4a5e7d3b64cb908666d636cd48548b87f9374&l=999 )

This can be reproduced by delivering a page that uses navigation timing served over TLS on an HTTP/0.9 connection.

Comment 1 by igrigo...@google.com, Nov 2 2017

Status: ExternalDependency (was: Untriaged)
Per https://www.w3.org/TR/resource-timing-2/#dom-performanceresourcetiming-nexthopprotocol...

> Note that the nextHopProtocol attribute is intended to identify the network protocol in use for the fetch regardless of how it was actually negotiated; that is, even if ALPN is not used to negotiate the network protocol, this attribute still uses the ALPN Protocol ID's to indicate the protocol in use.

That said, you're right, it looks like RFC7301 never registered http/0.9 or http/1.0 — le sigh. 

Filed errata against RFC7301: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5176

Comment 2 by rsleevi@chromium.org, Nov 2 2017 

Filing an Errata isn't the right thing to do - that's because the spec establishes the registry. You just need to file registration requests :)

Comment 3 by tdres...@chromium.org, Feb 28 2018

Status: Assigned (was: ExternalDependency)
Switching to "Assigned", based on #2.

Comment 4 by tdres...@chromium.org, Jun 21 2018 

Ilya, are you still the right owner for this?

Comment 5 by igrigo...@chromium.org, Jun 22 2018

Cc: igrigo...@chromum.org
Owner: y...@yoav.ws
Reassigning to Yoav, who recently landed some spec updates for this.

Comment 6 by y...@yoav.ws, Jun 22 2018 

Mike Bishop has filed a registration request for HTTP/0.9 and HTTP/1.0 last week (IANA #1113784). I'm hoping it will land soon.

Comment 7 by y...@yoav.ws, Jun 22 2018

Cc: mbis...@evequefou.be

Comment 8 by eveque...@gmail.com, Jun 26 2018 

Registration has landed. They're now officially official.

Comment 9 by y...@yoav.ws, Jun 26 2018

Status: Fixed (was: Assigned)
Awesome! And with that, I think we can close this one.
►

Sign in to add a comment