IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Webpush] Require the TTL header

Brian Raymor <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com> Tue, 16 February 2016 22:45 UTC

Return-Path: <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com>
X-Original-To: webpush@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: webpush@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AECD1A90A1 for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 14:45:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.002
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 ye90_Dp3Gzje for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 14:45:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1bon0771.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::1:771]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC3F51A9115 for <webpush@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 14:45:09 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=selector1; h=From:To:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=8qGKs1MrdquBso3UYMduF/u5dgtUKM1WkRoPDkF+yvQ=; b=YID9OIVEJBce1HJ5bdNc3hiChcjbUu1DsymzLsCjqpdks9A7imsThmwNwDOWrdSNBpdkkBydeBwhqclrCojmEELUVv/b3WavGm8DeIuOa4YpzdrWDDAgjn3PjBk5ypbr8EQGv52znb3OjpZt4L9onng+krfTbRIQwXZBLVvh+wg=
Received: from BY2PR0301MB0647.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.160.63.14) by BY2PR0301MB0648.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.160.63.140) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.409.15; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 22:44:51 +0000
Received: from BY2PR0301MB0647.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.63.14]) by BY2PR0301MB0647.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.63.14]) with mapi id 15.01.0409.017; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 22:44:51 +0000
From: Brian Raymor <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com>
To: Costin Manolache <costin@google.com>
Thread-Topic: Re: [Webpush] Require the TTL header
Thread-Index: AdFpCrXjzUkEsh6URySrfNlymrNO/w==
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 22:44:50 +0000
Message-ID: <BY2PR0301MB06471E5A3BE1442A4EAE0DF683AD0@BY2PR0301MB0647.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: google.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;google.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=microsoft.com;
x-originating-ip: [2601:600:8000:5a8:a991:fd36:d5f3:19e]
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: a74946fd-789e-4749-5cb8-08d33722c7d7
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BY2PR0301MB0648; 5:ke7JhMjtIWwjewIeFEqCZErPSJbP3aibEMf5ZOVC4kRvfORqkDp/EjtXGX92yYGDqa2mnpsEl29mBFNv400AEy8EMRCmieyC39GX1ltXoBvaDLyKjZ68tDM9tFkuFEk+kRWTJc7FnywYIscNqPLysQ==; 24:aEDmO7ouEPZCnMVvXvN4bLM73/Gj+DB6QC2UrwPx82YUoPhUmGBgozI2gFVBh/uWabUfQ/m3hrL0TRV1jFwl2jhIIdggIN0KM4Xsj6JWVns=
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY2PR0301MB0648;
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BY2PR0301MB064878595C926C99C2711C8B83AD0@BY2PR0301MB0648.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(61425038)(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(10201501046)(3002001)(61426038)(61427038); SRVR:BY2PR0301MB0648; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY2PR0301MB0648;
x-forefront-prvs: 0854128AF0
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(377454003)(45074003)(24454002)(5003600100002)(50986999)(5002640100001)(54356999)(5001960100002)(1220700001)(33656002)(586003)(102836003)(6116002)(5008740100001)(1096002)(110136002)(99286002)(2906002)(4326007)(189998001)(11100500001)(10090500001)(122556002)(19580405001)(19580395003)(10290500002)(10400500002)(76576001)(40100003)(92566002)(15975445007)(86612001)(2900100001)(77096005)(74316001)(5005710100001)(5004730100002)(86362001)(87936001)(3826002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2PR0301MB0648; H:BY2PR0301MB0647.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en;
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 16 Feb 2016 22:44:50.7442 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY2PR0301MB0648
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/webpush/3xwqCK1mElrjyYzvNI1lJtGa8ek>
Cc: "webpush@ietf.org" <webpush@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Webpush] Require the TTL header
X-BeenThere: webpush@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of potential IETF work on a web push protocol <webpush.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/webpush>, <mailto:webpush-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/webpush/>
List-Post: <mailto:webpush@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:webpush-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webpush>, <mailto:webpush-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 22:45:13 -0000

On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 12:48 PM, Costin Manolache <costin@gmail.com> wrote:

> I assume 202 (Accepted) would be better for TTL=0 if the service is not actually storing the message.

My reading of 202 (Accepted) is that it's intended for asynchronous operations:

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7231#section-6.3.3

   The 202 response is intentionally noncommittal.  Its purpose is to
   allow a server to accept a request for some other process (perhaps a
   batch-oriented process that is only run once per day) without
   requiring that the user agent's connection to the server persist
   until the process is completed.  The representation sent with this
   response ought to describe the request's current status and point to
   (or embed) a status monitor that can provide the user with an
   estimate of when the request will be fulfilled.

I suggest that we require the TTL - https://github.com/webpush-wg/webpush-protocol/issues/76 -
but maintain the current behavior where a Location is returned even for TTL=0.   There are already
special cases in the text for TTL=0 indicating that the resource may be deleted before the user agent can
acknowledge a message.  

As I noted in my earlier response to Ben, the Location resource is also subsequently required for the
synthesized GET:

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-webpush-protocol-03#section-7.1

   Each push message is pushed as the response to a synthesized GET
   request sent in a PUSH_PROMISE.  This GET request is made to the push
   message resource that was created by the push service when the
   application server requested message delivery.

...Brian

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email