search

web-platform-tests / rfcs

web-platform-tests RFCs
75 stars 63 forks source link

RFC 42: QUIC server in WPT #42

Closed Hexcles closed 4 years ago

Hexcles commented 4 years ago

Rendered

This RFC addresses https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/issues/19114

cc @yutakahirano

jgraham commented 4 years ago

@annevk Assuming I look at the implmentation details, is there someone from Mozilla who should give feedback on whether this meets any requirements from our side?

martinthomson commented 4 years ago

I think that this is a reasonable plan, but I can't comment on the specifics until I have more information about webtransport. In that respect, this is probably well premature.

If you regard the current design being proposed by Google as a fait accompli, this is probably enough, but the extra effort required to build something usable on top of a generic QUIC stack could turn out to be such that this approach becomes unwieldy.

Hexcles commented 4 years ago

Thanks for the constructive and insightful feedback!

I want to highlight one point: this has NOT been implemented yet, and the design of the QUIC server itself (internal architecture, handler API, etc.) is intentionally vague because I don't have the details yet and we will probably iterate on the design once we start prototyping -- @yutakahirano and the team will work on this.

The key part of this RFC is the integration between the QUIC server and the rest of WPT infra, which should not need to change regardless of the detailed design of the QUIC server itself. This RFC paves the way for prototyping and eventually productionizing the QUIC server within WPT with minimum overhead. We can send out another RFC when we are happy with a detailed server design or implementation.

Hexcles commented 4 years ago

@jgraham I've updated the RFC:

  1. Switch to off-by-default
  2. Clarify the scope of the RFC (i.e. not including server APIs)
  3. Clarify dependency management and list it as a "risk"

Could you take another look? There are a few open questions now:

Do you see any of these as blocking? These are some genuinely good questions to which I don't have perfect answers to. The currently proposed design makes some trade-offs in these areas.

Hexcles commented 4 years ago

ping @jgraham

Hexcles commented 4 years ago

@jgraham I think I've addressed all the remaining comments. Please take another look at the latest commit. Thanks!

Hexcles commented 4 years ago

ping @jgraham

Hexcles commented 4 years ago

Heads up: if there's no more comment I'll be merging this in 3 days (which will be a full week after the last comment).