glm-5.2
1baa619ce9
The monolithic open-questions.md (1310 lines, 47 OQs) was large enough to be unmanageable, with high size variance (OQ-42 at 220 lines next to OQ-06 at 8). Decomposed into one file per OQ under docs/architecture/questions/ (NNN-slug.md, mirroring the ADR convention), with open-questions.md retained as the index: theme-grouped tables plus a cross-theme Deferred/Blocked section that surfaces the 6 deferred OQs with their Blocked-on conditions inline (the safe-exit visibility surface). Per-OQ content moved verbatim; all 62 inbound links stay valid (none used anchors). README's curated OQ summary dropped (now redundant with the index tables). Also seeds tasks/architecture/ with this task plus two follow-ups found during the decompose: OQ-09/10 missing structured Blocked-on fields, and the tasks/architecture/ blocker-task half of the Safe Exit protocol being unenforced.
47 lines
2.6 KiB
Markdown
47 lines
2.6 KiB
Markdown
# OQ-38: WebTransport Standalone Relay Service Scope
|
|
|
|
- **Origin**: [ADR-034](decisions/034-outgoing-only-x509-and-three-peer-roles.md)
|
|
§5, [webtransport.md](crates/http/webtransport.md)
|
|
- **Status**: open (scope, not deferral)
|
|
- **Door type**: One-way (crate boundary), two-way (mechanism)
|
|
- **Priority**: low
|
|
- **Resolution**: There are two distinct "WebTransport proxy" concepts
|
|
that must not be conflated:
|
|
|
|
1. **In-process ALPN-stream-proxy (resolved, in `alknet-http`).**
|
|
The `h3` handler hands a WebTransport stream to another ALPN
|
|
handler (`SshAdapter`, `GitAdapter`, etc.) as a `Connection`, so
|
|
a browser with a WASM parser can reach any ALPN service via
|
|
WebTransport. This is resolved by
|
|
[ADR-040](decisions/040-webtransport-alpn-stream-proxy.md) and
|
|
lives in `alknet-http`'s `h3` handler. Not this OQ.
|
|
|
|
2. **Standalone relay service (this OQ).** A full relay — a fork of
|
|
`iroh-relay` — that provides NAT traversal infrastructure with
|
|
WebTransport-based proxy as a fallback alongside WebSocket. This
|
|
is a separate service, not a mode of the `h3` handler: it
|
|
terminates the browser's WebTransport connection and forwards
|
|
encrypted traffic to a P2P hub's Ed25519 endpoint (so the hub need
|
|
not expose its own public X.509 cert). ADR-034 §5 recorded it in
|
|
the h3/WebTransport bucket; ADR-038 brought h3/WebTransport into
|
|
scope (later superseded by [ADR-044](decisions/044-defer-webtransport-browsers-use-websocket.md),
|
|
which deferred h3/WebTransport as a scope decision — the browser
|
|
bidirectional path uses WebSocket); ADR-040 resolved the in-process
|
|
proxy (now parked per ADR-044). This OQ is the remaining scope
|
|
question: does the standalone relay live in a future `alknet-relay`
|
|
crate (a fork of `iroh-relay` with WebTransport proxy fallback) or
|
|
is it out of scope for the current alknet work?
|
|
|
|
This is a genuine scope question, not a deferral. The relay use case
|
|
is not yet concrete enough to commit the crate boundary — no
|
|
deployment has asked for a standalone relay with WebTransport
|
|
fallback yet, and the design (transport-only proxy, no auth-model
|
|
change per ADR-034 §5) is clear but the home is not. The decision is
|
|
made when the browser-to-P2P-peer relay use case becomes concrete;
|
|
until then it is tracked here, not deferred with "v1/later" language.
|
|
The relay does not change the auth model (bearer token +
|
|
`PeerEntry.auth_token_hash`; relay is transport-only), so it does not
|
|
block any other ADR.
|
|
- **Cross-references**: ADR-027, ADR-030, ADR-034, ADR-038 (superseded),
|
|
ADR-040 (parked), ADR-044, [webtransport.md](crates/http/webtransport.md)
|