Thanks - I have entered a shortened version of the "longer explanation"
under "interoperability risks".


On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 5:13 PM Philip Jägenstedt <[email protected]>
wrote:

> LGTM3 with the chromestatus entry updated with the "Longer explanation"
> text or a summary of it.
>
> The "abnormal case" described indeed sounds unlikely, and if we're wrong
> about this, we can use the kill switch.
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 5:08 PM Chris Harrelson <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi, Please update the Interoperability and Compatibility of your
>> Chromestatus entry to include the comments made here. Currently it says
>> "none", which is not quite right.
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 7:24 AM Rick Byers <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Sounds low risk of compat issues to me and the WebRTC field trial system
>>> should be sufficient to ensure any unexpected breakage can be quickly
>>> mitigated.
>>> LGTM2
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 13, 2025 at 10:33 AM Mike Taylor <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks both - that's helpful.
>>>>
>>>> LGTM1
>>>> On 10/10/25 7:09 a.m., Philipp Hancke wrote:
>>>>
>>>> i'd expect the typical usage to be iterating over the extensions and
>>>> setting the desired state for each one you care about without looking at
>>>> the current state which should, fingers crossed, work just the same.
>>>>
>>>> Am Fr., 10. Okt. 2025 um 11:29 Uhr schrieb 'Harald Alvestrand' via
>>>> blink-dev <[email protected]>:
>>>>
>>>>> Longer explanation....
>>>>>
>>>>> This API has been used up to now to turn on behavior (in the form of
>>>>> RTP header extensions) on the RTP connection that was shipped as
>>>>> off-by-default. We don't believe that anyone has actively used it to turn
>>>>> off features.
>>>>> This usage should see no change (therefore no risk). What will change
>>>>> is that when features that are on by default are turned off in 
>>>>> negotiation,
>>>>> they will remain off in subsequent negotiation rounds.
>>>>> There are two normal cases I can think of, and one abnormal one:
>>>>>
>>>>> - The responder does not support the feature, and therefore always
>>>>> replies with "feature off". Result is that it will not be turned on - no
>>>>> change.
>>>>> - The responder supports the feature, but has rejected it in initial
>>>>> negotiation because it does not want to use it. In that case, under
>>>>> previous behavior, it would have to respond to all subsequent negotiation
>>>>> rounds by turning off the feature again. Under the new behavior, it will
>>>>> already be off in the offer, so the result of turning it off again will 
>>>>> not
>>>>> make any difference - no change.
>>>>>
>>>>> The abnormal case:
>>>>>
>>>>> - The responder supports the feature, but has rejected it in initial
>>>>> negotiation because it does not want to use it, but does not have code to
>>>>> turn it off in subsequent negotiation (likely due to this code path not
>>>>> being tested). In this case, the feature will presently turn on after a
>>>>> subsequent round of negotiation despite being initially rejected. This is
>>>>> not likely to be a desired behavior.
>>>>>
>>>>> So we think that this change brings no change to expected behavior for
>>>>> current users, and if the hypothetical user that turns off features using
>>>>> this API exists, it is more likely to fix an undetected bug in their code
>>>>> than to introduce undesired behavior.
>>>>>
>>>>> Does that answer the question?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 2:54 PM Mike Taylor <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10/7/25 8:39 a.m., 'Harald Alvestrand' via blink-dev wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Contact emails*
>>>>>> [email protected], [email protected]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Specification*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://w3c.github.io/webrtc-extensions/#rtp-header-extension-control-modifications
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Summary*
>>>>>> Users of https://chromestatus.com/feature/5680189201711104 found
>>>>>> that the API as specified was not ergonomic for subsequent offer/answer.
>>>>>> The WG has adopted a revised behavior, merged to spec in
>>>>>> https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-extensions/pull/238, that ensures that
>>>>>> subsequent offer/answer does not permute the header extensions negotiated
>>>>>> unless the user wants that to happen.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Blink component*
>>>>>> Blink>WebRTC>PeerConnection
>>>>>> <https://issues.chromium.org/issues?q=customfield1222907:%22Blink%3EWebRTC%3EPeerConnection%22>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Web Feature ID*
>>>>>> webrtc <https://webstatus.dev/features/webrtc>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *TAG review*
>>>>>> None
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *TAG review status*
>>>>>> Not applicable
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Risks*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Interoperability and Compatibility*
>>>>>> None
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As a non WebRTC expert, could you help me understand what kind of
>>>>>> risk this change might bring to applications relying on the current
>>>>>> shipping behavior?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Gecko*: No signal
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *WebKit*: No signal
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Web developers*: No signals
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Other signals*:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *WebView application risks*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, such
>>>>>> that it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based applications?
>>>>>> Low risk. Protected by WebRTC field trial
>>>>>> "WebRTC-HeaderExtensionNegotiateMemory".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Debuggability*
>>>>>> No DevTools support needed. Existing webrtc-internals should be
>>>>>> sufficient for debugging.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows,
>>>>>> Mac, Linux, ChromeOS, Android, and Android WebView)?*
>>>>>> Yes
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests
>>>>>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md>?*
>>>>>> Yes
>>>>>> webrtc-extensions/RTCRtpTransceiver-headerExtensionControl.html will
>>>>>> be affected by the spec change. A test update will be shipped together 
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> enabling the feature. wpt.fyi link:
>>>>>> https://wpt.fyi/results/webrtc-extensions/RTCRtpTransceiver-headerExtensionControl.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Flag name on about://flags*
>>>>>> WebRTC-HeaderExtensionNegotiateMemory (WebRTC field trial)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Finch feature name*
>>>>>> None
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Non-finch justification*
>>>>>> The change is in webrtc, so it uses WebRTC field trials which provide
>>>>>> the same functionality as finch flags in practice (including the ability 
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> do Finch experiments/kill switches)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Rollout plan*
>>>>>> Will ship enabled for all users
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Requires code in //chrome?*
>>>>>> False
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Tracking bug*
>>>>>> https://issues.webrtc.org/439514253
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Availability expectation*
>>>>>> The base spec being modified is only available in Chromium browsers
>>>>>> so far. Given support from other vendors in WG, we expect that when 
>>>>>> others
>>>>>> ship this, they will conform to the modified spec.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Adoption expectation*
>>>>>> Feature will be used by partners utilizing WebRTC advanced features.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Adoption plan*
>>>>>> Feature will be used in the rollout of L4S congestion control in
>>>>>> Meet, with other interactive video products expected to follow.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Estimated milestones*
>>>>>> Shipping on desktop 144
>>>>>> Shipping on Android 144
>>>>>> Shipping on WebView 144
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Anticipated spec changes*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All spec changes merged.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5135528638939136?gate=5170761664954368
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform Status
>>>>>> <https://chromestatus.com/>.
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> 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 [email protected].
>>>>>> To view this discussion visit
>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOqqYVGGxvwJcjsJ1gf3VzhoyOBHiQiqWpL15FUWWHjZS0m0jw%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOqqYVGGxvwJcjsJ1gf3VzhoyOBHiQiqWpL15FUWWHjZS0m0jw%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 [email protected].
>>>>> To view this discussion visit
>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOqqYVGk6v_KV4DOpghk%3DKscgxMRA%3D%2BCd38%2B_JjjdCEMvXg8bA%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOqqYVGk6v_KV4DOpghk%3DKscgxMRA%3D%2BCd38%2B_JjjdCEMvXg8bA%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 [email protected].
>>>> To view this discussion visit
>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/d7d13930-0d66-40e8-a33c-d44bb30deaa7%40chromium.org
>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/d7d13930-0d66-40e8-a33c-d44bb30deaa7%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 [email protected].
>>> To view this discussion visit
>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFUtAY_6ArukOP2ohqgHf9pXu%3DgBctH4BYz-jBMNizCN%2Bn5Yxg%40mail.gmail.com
>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFUtAY_6ArukOP2ohqgHf9pXu%3DgBctH4BYz-jBMNizCN%2Bn5Yxg%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 [email protected].
>> To view this discussion visit
>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOMQ%2Bw_-P%3DFNn3%3DA9yX5oP37TAh4_JA4YqnHNzgkbyxJodLckQ%40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOMQ%2Bw_-P%3DFNn3%3DA9yX5oP37TAh4_JA4YqnHNzgkbyxJodLckQ%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 [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOqqYVH%2BCJQfUTpiRAfygUWzm-1GRz4EWXx4GC5ZuctuqSbZAg%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to