draft-asilvas-http-push-assets-00 comments

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Wed, 13 July 2016 00:57 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 082B312DA88 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 17:57:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.308
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.308 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.287, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 41c1CFrKqU7A for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 17:57:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CDEAA12D5D5 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 17:57:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1bN8QY-0007kZ-PA for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 00:53:26 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 00:53:26 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1bN8QY-0007kZ-PA@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1bN8QU-0007iA-VG for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 00:53:23 +0000
Received: from mail-qk0-f178.google.com ([209.85.220.178]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1bN8QN-0003iM-Dy for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 00:53:21 +0000
Received: by mail-qk0-f178.google.com with SMTP id o67so30357096qke.1 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 17:52:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=LxKV/D599eB5Ldib8UkttNqzPpVFCwArWbZiIqmvlIM=; b=A1IU7nWemVkMJRIxpiC0YxpgjStN732KaPviGFSH+75fNs4LN/GjCLjwS2N03owil0 4tjt9A7Smmv8rvqR27HjZvBcVGKdpCSWgOKbM59rv2LWF9SLQkhrH5p3U70kJYYHjgLy zgSYbQyfZKw5JQA5pHowo23X7IkhCIV0a6E8CrkSeZxrjK5+tJu7PLWFRfYBDV38kGCz yLRVPDKbMr6dA2a3I5a5DC8ZsLutP4vkCQ7/dvPWJk66Pbu9R4Hhkck6FyTaDNK06rmO far6FUz+ja4WVV99J7ZY9+3LNTTzEIEinSmtSdPvZbShw/4IdMqx3o7odxhw8LRrfNVz n6fg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=LxKV/D599eB5Ldib8UkttNqzPpVFCwArWbZiIqmvlIM=; b=CXL8zm+okrFwLb8LhpllOUd+jjYlmmgxvIOxb9a/bCbT2L2Bc7HO5NBywPEvuRhWXj 1RXTuMcEIQXxkGkA0byse4GyU1KBQJJa7EcDO+XFIY+2yVCdOb5e9UJG7WjBIL/1p1jw 7EjDNQEoygDmTLnGylT71245lSRMHGXlAzYMC0Iyk6lgv4T/xsytwporhGGOlXPeDP48 7ayEhCVC69cyu9mYnzcYm8jBl07GEn3HVqnzH3CRUqtsqSwyxBwuWMqjmzCOrpFarzez c6xuMLQkatFdTqBonzDIJ2JbkyQcgWA67O0pCzjFtELWsnV7KlimLKs15V9xEH3tNs7i ntYg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tIkHgq+nZx91M4bjC5nv7ODR2jynzfW843ZZqcPghh/94P9Ym6qYIE7QRxT4q6R97Ikyt4KuBYrdt2Ayg==
X-Received: by 10.233.239.87 with SMTP id d84mr7105088qkg.68.1468371169609; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 17:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.140.22.38 with HTTP; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 17:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 10:52:49 +1000
Message-ID: <CABkgnnVVja__isnUTmn3hgbNi8B=6FhYNnzwE+hAdxuS=WOHxw@mail.gmail.com>
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, asilvas@godaddy.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.220.178; envelope-from=martin.thomson@gmail.com; helo=mail-qk0-f178.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.9
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=1.830, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1bN8QN-0003iM-Dy 5488fcee8ae76dbcda242f47ca1bc012
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: draft-asilvas-http-push-assets-00 comments
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CABkgnnVVja__isnUTmn3hgbNi8B=6FhYNnzwE+hAdxuS=WOHxw@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/31938
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

First, I think that there is an interesting idea hidden in here.  It
could be that it's complementary to the more generic digests idea.

However, I found it impossible to determine how this document is
claiming to achieve its stated goals.  None of the examples include
header fields, which would have gone a long way to explaining this.
The new header fields don't really say what each is used for.  That
leaves me guessing about how this fits together.

Here's my best guess, though I have to confess that I can't connect
this to what Section 4 says:

On request N.  A server provides a new header field with responses
that create a secondary identifier for resources.  I'm really guessing
here, but I assume that unlike etag, this header field includes a
value that is the same for a group of resources.

On request >N. Clients include a new header field with requests that
controls what is pushed.  If it includes '*', then everything is
pushed.  If it includes 'no-push', then nothing is pushed.  If it
includes a list of these new push-asset-keys, then anything matching
those keys is not pushed.

Based on this, I'm fairly certain that I don't understand the
proposal, because this design doesn't require both Push-Asset-Key and
Push-Asset-Match header fields.  I'm clearly missing something.

I did start to look at the code, but without a better overview of what
it aims to achieve, I'm afraid that I'm not going to get much from it.