We have the same situation as Junji here. For us, it means that our solution would be broken across all websites since the platforms are using our iframe URL and we have 0 ability to inject code at their top Domain (nor do we want to). On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 8:33:57 PM UTC+3 Junji Genesys wrote:
> Our application has no access to the top-level context, so there is no way > for us to include our third-party trial script in the top-level context. > We basically provide Salesforce with our embedded client URL, and they use > it to load and embed our client in their iframe. > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 11:30 AM Mike Taylor <mike...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> Yes, if you sign up for a 3rd party token and inject that into the site >> embedding your iframe before your iframe is created, that will give you >> access to unpartitioned storage (until the Deprecation Trial expires). >> >> Here's a demo that injects an 3P origin trial token then creates an >> iframe: >> >> https://rogue-lace-join.glitch.me/ >> >> And the relevant source files: >> >> https://glitch.com/edit/#!/rogue-lace-join?path=index.html%3A9%3A8 >> https://miketaylr.com/misc/3pspdt.js >> >> Feel free to reach out to me off-list to discuss more or if you have any >> further questions. >> On 8/22/23 11:40 PM, Yoav Weiss wrote: >> >> Is your application running script in the top level context? Since the >> deprecation trial is implemented as a third-party origin trial, you may be >> able to sign up as a third party. >> >> On Tue, Aug 22, 2023, 23:48 Junji Genesys <junji....@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hello Kyra, >>> >>> Thank you for communicating about the rollout plan for the storage >>> partitioning. >>> >>> We've found that the new storage partitioning behavior has impacted our >>> product, which is a web client application embedded in an iframe inside >>> Salesforce and provides call center agents functionality such as handling >>> phone calls. We use browser-based phone (WebRTC phone) that can pop out as >>> a separate window, which communicates with the embedded client frame via >>> localStorage and BroadcastChannel. The new storage partitioning restriction >>> blocks this communication as our application is running as an embedded >>> iframe with a top-level domain that differs from our browser phone running >>> in a popped out window. Our browser phone does not work properly in that >>> scenario, and as a result, users are not able to answer their calls. Many >>> of our customers have started reporting this issue, and it is currently our >>> top priority to address this issue given its time-sensitive nature. >>> >>> We've also learned about an existence of the experimental flag, two >>> relevant enterprise policies and the deprecation trial for disabling this >>> new change as a temporary measure. We're especially interested in the >>> deprecation trial, but that can be activated only by the top-level domain >>> site and there is no way for the embedded content in an iframe to activate >>> the deprecation trial. >>> >>> I've contacted Salesforce support to see if they can sign-up and >>> activate the deprecation trial, but they asked me to reach out to Chrome >>> team to see if Chrome team can create a ticket with Salesforce and help >>> them with the deprecation trial for unpartitioned third-party storage. >>> >>> Would you be able to work with Salesforce for the deprecation trial in >>> their environment? >>> Also, since you might have dealt with other third-party vendors before, >>> what suggestions do you have on how to approach a situation like this? >>> I greatly appreciate your prompt response and help on this matter. >>> >>> Thank you, >>> >>> Junji >>> >>> On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 1:50:24 PM UTC-4 Kyra Seevers wrote: >>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> Quick update: we began the rollout to 10% stable today. >>>> >>>> The new rollout schedule is approximately: >>>> Stable 50%: Aug 28th >>>> Stable 100%: Sept 11th >>>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 2, 2023 at 11:18 AM Tim Williams <tim.j.w...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hey Mike, >>>>> Thanks for the update! >>>>> I totally understand your timing, and it's on us to blame for missing >>>>> this out (or at least we thought that it would be together with the >>>>> cookie >>>>> update which was postponed several times). >>>>> >>>>> Anyway, I encourage you to postpone the timing until the trial bug >>>>> will be fixed to enable us, and other developers who would like to use >>>>> the >>>>> trial meta tag to be able to do so. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks! >>>>> >>>>> On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 7:55:33 PM UTC+3 Mike Taylor wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for the bug report! We'll triage it in our regular meeting >>>>>> tomorrow. >>>>>> >>>>>> And yes, your understanding of the timing is correct (we've been working >>>>>> on this project for 2+ years >>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/WXNzM0WiQ-s/m/l10NGhaoAQAJ>, >>>>>> >>>>>> and in dev-trial since September >>>>>> <https://developer.chrome.com/en/blog/storage-partitioning-dev-trial/> >>>>>> of last year). Note that advancing to a higher percentage will depend on >>>>>> the stability and web-compatibility of partitioned 3P storage. >>>>>> >>>>>> thanks, >>>>>> Mike >>>>>> On 7/30/23 12:04 PM, Tim Williams wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I've submitted the following bug: >>>>>> https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1468811 since >>>>>> the trial isn't working while I did everything right. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Saturday, July 29, 2023 at 2:52:22 AM UTC+3 Tim Williams wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hey There, >>>>>>> I am truly struggling to understand the timing here. >>>>>>> Currently, the partitioning is under a flag. >>>>>>> Are you saying that the flag would be turned on to 100% of Desktop >>>>>>> and Android users on Sept 8th THIS YEAR?? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That's a huge and extremely fast change, wow. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thursday, July 27, 2023 at 10:33:01 PM UTC+3 Kyra Seevers wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> M115 is now being served at 100% on Desktop and Android. We will >>>>>>>> begin the rollout to Stable 1% shortly - the approximate rollout >>>>>>>> schedule >>>>>>>> is now as follows: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Stable 1%: July 28th >>>>>>>> Stable 10%: Aug 11th >>>>>>>> Stable 50%: Aug 25th >>>>>>>> Stable 100%: Sept 8th >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 11:52 AM Mike Taylor <mike...@chromium.org> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> No, we don't know with certainty. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You can watch >>>>>>>>> https://chromiumdash.appspot.com/releases?platform=Windows to see >>>>>>>>> when 115 is being served to 100% for all platforms. Today it's at 50% >>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>> Windows, for example. >>>>>>>>> On 7/26/23 5:39 PM, Jagadeesha B Y wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Do we know when does M115 will hit 100%? Exact date would help us >>>>>>>>> to communicate on the storage partition impact to our customers. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 2:12:10 PM UTC-7 >>>>>>>>> mike...@chromium.org wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 7/26/23 4:01 PM, Vi S wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Kyra, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Per your message here ( >>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/24hK6DKJnqY/m/tu0i5OmhCAAJ) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> it sounds like as of 7/26/2023, the Storage Partitioning change has >>>>>>>>>> not >>>>>>>>>> been released yet since M115 is not served to 100% of users. Is that >>>>>>>>>> correct? My understanding of this message is that M115 is currently >>>>>>>>>> served >>>>>>>>>> to 12.5% of users and that once M115 is served to 100% of users >>>>>>>>>> (which will >>>>>>>>>> happen in the next ~4 weeks), only then will the storage partition >>>>>>>>>> change >>>>>>>>>> be rolled out in a gradual manner. Is this understanding accurate? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> That's correct. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Additionally, would you be able to provide an updated schedule >>>>>>>>>> for the rollout of the storage partitioning change (similar to the >>>>>>>>>> one >>>>>>>>>> linked here: >>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/24hK6DKJnqY/m/Tts2gjrEBwAJ) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Once we begin the gradual roll-out, we'll provide a estimated >>>>>>>>>> rollout schedule on this thread (I hesitate to do so now - it's hard >>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>> know when we will begin exactly). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thank you >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Monday, July 24, 2023 at 10:18:26 AM UTC-4 Kyra Seevers wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi there, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your email - as of today (Monday 7/24/23), the >>>>>>>>>>> feature is not rolled-out to stable. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> However, I can confirm that the rollout schedule for this >>>>>>>>>>> feature begins in M115 at Stable 1% (once M115 is served to 100% of >>>>>>>>>>> users). >>>>>>>>>>> M115 is currently served to 12.5% of users - you can track the >>>>>>>>>>> status at >>>>>>>>>>> https://chromiumdash.appspot.com/releases?platform=Windows. Two >>>>>>>>>>> weeks after that, we'll go to 10%, assuming no large stability or >>>>>>>>>>> compatibility regressions. Then 50 and 100% at additional 2 week >>>>>>>>>>> increments. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> In the meantime, we have a deprecation trial ( >>>>>>>>>>> https://developer.chrome.com/blog/storage-partitioning-deprecation-trial/#participate-in-the-deprecation-trials) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> running in M115+ that allows sites who opt-in to maintain >>>>>>>>>>> unpartitioned >>>>>>>>>>> storage for a few milestones while they develop a >>>>>>>>>>> storage-partitioning-compatible solution. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Kyra >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 7:05 PM Jagadeesha B Y < >>>>>>>>>>> jaga...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I see that Chrome 115 release notes - >>>>>>>>>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5723617717387264 mentioning >>>>>>>>>>>> about storage partition being enabled by default. Could someone >>>>>>>>>>>> confirm >>>>>>>>>>>> how gradual this rollout is? do we know if storage partition is >>>>>>>>>>>> rolled out >>>>>>>>>>>> fully? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Our SASS product has a heavy reliance on Shared worker and this >>>>>>>>>>>> would break our customer use cases. We use shared worker to >>>>>>>>>>>> co-ordinate >>>>>>>>>>>> Web RTC signalling and websocket management which is critical for >>>>>>>>>>>> the app. >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, May 31, 2023 at 8:42:15 AM UTC-7 >>>>>>>>>>>> mk...@chromium.org wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> LGTM3 with all the caveats about careful rollout discussed >>>>>>>>>>>>> above. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -mike >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 5:39 PM Mike Taylor < >>>>>>>>>>>>> mike...@chromium.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> OK - let's consider this I2S officially revived. Looking for >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a 3rd LGTM to begin shipping in M115. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> We have implemented 3rd party deprecation trial support for >>>>>>>>>>>>>> M115+ (see >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://developer.chrome.com/blog/storage-partitioning-deprecation-trial/#participate-in-the-deprecation-trials), >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and extended the deprecation trial's expiration date accordingly >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to account >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the delay. And we have the Enterprise policy ready to go. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The rollout schedule will look something like the following, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pending metrics and compatibility stability: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> July 25th: 1% of Stable population (approximately 1 week >>>>>>>>>>>>>> after M115 is released) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Aug 8th: 10% >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Aug 22nd: 50% >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sep 5: 100% >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> As always, if we discover significant user-facing breakage >>>>>>>>>>>>>> we'll explore pausing or rolling back to address. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/1/23 10:43 AM, Mike Taylor wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Rick and Yoav. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> We learned from two partners (one internal, one external) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> late last week that a 3P deprecation trial would be needed for >>>>>>>>>>>>>> them to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> preserve widely-used functionality while they work on a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> migration strategy. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> We're tracking the work in crbug.com/1441411 and hope to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> have that ready by M115. Once we land the fix, I'll circle back >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and look >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a 3rd LGTM and have an updated rollout schedule. :) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/1/23 12:21 AM, Yoav Weiss wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> LGTM2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2023, 16:23 Rick Byers <rby...@chromium.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 2:02 PM Mike Taylor < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mike...@chromium.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/26/23 9:36 AM, Mike Taylor wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > On 4/25/23 12:00 PM, Rick Byers wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> In terms of the standards / process piece, it looks as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if the spec >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> PRs have all stalled for several months. What do you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> necessary to get these unblocked and landed? As the last >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> engine to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> implement this behavior, perhaps we shouldn't feel too >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compelled to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> block shipping on PRs landing? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was gently reminded offline that I didn't answer this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> part of your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question - oops. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Right now it seems to me that the costs of landing these >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spec PRs is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> higher than we're willing to block on, given the requested >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> refactoring >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (and yes, it's unfortunate that 3 engines would be shipping >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> essentially >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unspecced behavior, but that's where we're at). That said, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm happy to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> devote my few IC hours to pushing these along as a personal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> project over >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the coming months. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Mike. I trust your and wanderview@'s judgement here - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I know how hard y'all have been willing to work in the past to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> right thing done in specs. Thanks for being willing to keep >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pushing in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parallel. But given two other implementations have already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shipped this, it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was clearly already a spec bug that the spec didn't reflect >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reality. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> agree that we shouldn't block shipping a 3rd implementation on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spec >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> refactoring work. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LGTM1 to ship from my perspective. Obviously this will need >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a very thoughtful and careful roll-out. But I trust Mike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his team to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> engage with impacted folks to make sure it goes smoothly, as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they did with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> UA reduction. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Google Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it, send an email to blink-dev+...@chromium.org. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/bc52292b-9142-adad-d126-b93231468ed0%40chromium.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/bc52292b-9142-adad-d126-b93231468ed0%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>>>>> Google Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from >>>>>>>>>>>> it, send an email to blink-dev+...@chromium.org. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/0e6d131f-f6c7-4bbb-ad3e-bd68cd63ec0dn%40chromium.org >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/0e6d131f-f6c7-4bbb-ad3e-bd68cd63ec0dn%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Kyra Seevers (she/her) | Software Engineer | >>>>>>>>>>> kyras...@google.com | 859-537-9917 <(859)%20537-9917> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Kyra Seevers (she/her) | Software Engineer | kyras...@google.com >>>>>>>> | 859-537-9917 <(859)%20537-9917> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to blink-dev+...@chromium.org. >>>>> >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/4cf940ed-3dd6-4c49-91af-e6b7c7d42ac4n%40chromium.org >>>>> >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/4cf940ed-3dd6-4c49-91af-e6b7c7d42ac4n%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>> . >>>>> >>>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to blink-dev+...@chromium.org. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/15914fe7-8e14-4580-b1f2-d038ddfba9d6n%40chromium.org >>> >>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/15914fe7-8e14-4580-b1f2-d038ddfba9d6n%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>> . >>> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "blink-dev" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to blink-dev+...@chromium.org. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfV9jqK7%2BA-W7A8tWK03vcaqS2onRymPzFxiVOPG1bGcSQ%40mail.gmail.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfV9jqK7%2BA-W7A8tWK03vcaqS2onRymPzFxiVOPG1bGcSQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/77c5eff2-c08a-46c4-9d2c-415aa2578706n%40chromium.org.
