Re: [sipcore] Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-sipcore-sip-push-21: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) - the COMMENT issues

[Ben Campbell <[e-mail]>]

> On Jan 7, 2019, at 1:04 PM, Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> S 1.
> >>      will request push notifications towards the UA.
> >>
> >>      When the proxy receives a SIP request for a new dialog or a stand-
> >>      alone SIP request addressed towards a UA, or when the proxy
> >>      determines that the UA needs to send a binding-refresh REGISTER
> >>      request, the proxy will request a push notification towards the UA,
> >
> > "request ... towards" is ungrammatical
> 
> Is "request a push notification to be sent towards the UA" better?
> 
> >I would say "request that a push notification be sent to"
> 
> Ok.
> 
> ...
> 
> S 4.1.
> >>
> >>      NOTE: The VAPID specific procedures of the SIP UA are outside the
> >>      scope of this document.
> >>
> >>      When the UA receives a push notification, it MUST send a binding-
> >>      refresh REGISTER request, using normal SIP procedures.  If there are
> >
> >This seems unnecessarily restrictive. Are we never going to want any
> >other kind of push notification?
> 
> Well, in order for this mechanism to work, it has to be a MUST, and the procedures obviously only applies to UAs that use the SIP push mechanism.
> 
> >Yeah, this seems like a pretty major architectural flaw in this design, tbh, one that is
> >remedied by just using RFC 8030-style notifications that contain content.
> 
> Other push notification services support content too, but we decided that we are not going to specify that for SIP push.
> 
> IF there comes a future case, where multiple SIP usages of push notifications have to co-exist, we can define usage of content (and e.g., define that SIP push is default).

Just a note: This came up in WG discussion and again during the AD evaluation. IIRC, the consensus was to not attempt to solve the issue in this draft.

That being said, I think it would be worth including a note that the potential exists and is being punted to the future.

Thanks,

Ben.