Define protocol version and expected lifecycle with browsers
colinbendell opened this issue · 0 comments
colinbendell commented
The protocol version in the key-commitment example specifies that the value should be PrivateStateTokenV3VOPRF
. However, in the current version of Chrome the value is V1 (PrivateStateTokenV1VOPRF
). What is the expected naming convention for this field? Should it be a structured header with the version as a numeric field? Since PrivateStateTokenV3VOPRF was already in the wild, will we expect PrivateStateTokenV3VOPRF to be skipped in the future? Is there an expectation of major and minor versions for compatibility?
I could imagine this field being more structured and mirror the sec-ch-ua:
Sec-Private-State-Token-Crypto-Version: "VOPRF";v="1"