Plumb firstPartyForCookies() to MediaPlayerBridge

media/base/media_url_params.h

Index: media/base/media_url_params.h
diff --git a/media/base/media_url_params.h b/media/base/media_url_params.h
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..881cd09b4cdced902ba8353f63da140fab3f7ab0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/media/base/media_url_params.h
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+// Copyright 2016 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.
+// Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
+// found in the LICENSE file.
+
+#ifndef MEDIA_BASE_MEDIA_URL_PARAMS_H_
+#define MEDIA_BASE_MEDIA_URL_PARAMS_H_
+
+#include "url/gurl.h"
+
+namespace media {
+
+// Encapsulates the necessary information in order to play media in URL based
+// playback (as opposed to stream based).
+// See MediaUrlDemuxer and MediaPlayerRenderer.
+struct MEDIA_EXPORT MediaUrlParams {
+  // URL of the media to be played.
+  GURL media_url;
+
+  // Used to play media in authenticated scenarios.
+  GURL first_party_for_cookies;

[xhwang, 2016/10/21 00:02:19]

Could you please add some more comments about this, it's not trivial to
understand for people familiar with media but not net.

Also, since this is a URL, does it make sense to name this something like
"first_party_url_" (as you have in your test).

[tguilbert, 2016/10/21 03:05:58]

I was hesitant to add detailed comments, because I am not a net expert myself,
and didn't want to accidentally say anything misleading (especially if there
were security implications).

To the best of my knowledge, and to my current understanding, the comment I
added in this 2nd iteration is true.

I would rather leave it as first_party_for_cookies, because it seems to be the
name that is used across all the files that use it.

+};
+
+}  // namespace media
+
+#endif  // MEDIA_BASE_MEDIA_URL_PARAMS_H_