Re: [Webpush] status code for messages dropped before TTL expiration

Brian Raymor <> Tue, 17 November 2015 21:37 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E41A1AC3A5 for <>; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 13:37:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.002
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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QdSPRXsMK5T9 for <>; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 13:37:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 220161B30F1 for <>; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 13:37:44 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=selector1; h=From:To:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=uDdCuaOGvYclnrXrYdJ1o+tZQKfC5JrGC0JCvQqJJnQ=; b=fSyZNBITYfCT8o/Tf3GQo6IVZi+vM7iZvSsPbATPYBcP5L4kFJD8gZa1zNyylzpnSWXgPW04H5ITTsh4Uuc2DAtz0E84jjSDzxTf1in1WW58UztvkTKwegrUpNw6tbjj57+H6TSmHZhm4RX35L8P93icFdb/HwneXNj3Dagj8g0=
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.325.17; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 21:37:44 +0000
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.01.0325.019; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 21:37:44 +0000
From: Brian Raymor <>
To: "Martin Thomson (" <>, Darshak Thakore <>
Thread-Topic: [Webpush] status code for messages dropped before TTL expiration
Thread-Index: AQHRHI4Tneheu7lS5k62ROaDbLSZfJ6XVSwAgAAIpkA=
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 21:37:43 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is );
x-originating-ip: []
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BY2PR0301MB0646; 5:IVDdymBMSNYEXXRsFGl4TSv3RMg2pqGzIU2ZyXRedB+qenagMEI1hHckQyAo1xvAqCsk7zYKP9quGrXce5lf19xoYA6o1Qd8tMVrfIwcK9f7oCiRYY84CLZ4tD5/wUsBkZgYHqp0d3cSfm7mJ+8V2Q==; 24:5NebSB3ssUAVNQhFs39LV0G/RwQCKMahayPQtj39HQk+7jg5lNGnqAYPS6Kt2y3QWBGcONPlkm95sEZEDyqYUdXiZ4/5byYP1y5O7o1LxIc=; 20:5XXgsL2URhDpULZAtXBlrMiGrIDG1Z5O6vcwpWPCjNeEm+YmMrS1r1eGjP2R/Sf6DXyhl6H3eAqRwcziqsTn3A==
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY2PR0301MB0646;
x-o365eop-header: O365_EOP: Allow for Unauthenticated Relay
x-o365ent-eop-header: Message processed by - O365_ENT: Allow from ranges (Engineering ONLY)
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(61425024)(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(520078)(10201501046)(3002001)(61426024)(61427024); SRVR:BY2PR0301MB0646; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY2PR0301MB0646;
x-forefront-prvs: 07630F72AD
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(377454003)(189002)(199003)(51444003)(24454002)(77096005)(86362001)(5002640100001)(8990500004)(106356001)(10400500002)(10290500002)(86612001)(5005710100001)(106116001)(105586002)(5003600100002)(99286002)(87936001)(5008740100001)(5007970100001)(11100500001)(586003)(54356999)(2950100001)(66066001)(5001920100001)(2900100001)(189998001)(5001960100002)(102836002)(5001770100001)(76176999)(97736004)(81156007)(50986999)(33656002)(101416001)(40100003)(10090500001)(5004730100002)(74316001)(76576001)(92566002)(19580395003)(19580405001)(122556002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2PR0301MB0646;; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None ( does not designate permitted sender hosts)
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 17 Nov 2015 21:37:43.9024 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY2PR0301MB0646
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [Webpush] status code for messages dropped before TTL expiration
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of potential IETF work on a web push protocol <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 21:37:46 -0000

On November 11 2015 at 1:23 PM, Martin Thomson <> wrote:

> Generally, I think that we wanted to ask http(bis) for opinions.  

Yes. I have drafted a message and will forward to httpbis today.

> Maybe we can just use TTL.  If it is present (and therefore non-zero)
> then it's an indication that the TTL hasn't run out, even though the
> message resource is Not Found/Gone.

This is a reasonable mitigation. It's a cleaner variation to the 4XX + Acknowledgement-Data header field
proposed in the IETF 94 presentation, since the TTL is more clearly related to the failure.

In addition, if we decide to adopt Acknowledgement-Data later, this ensures that:

1. The data remains opaque. There are no reserved documented values to signal failure.
2. The data remains application specific. The push service is not a source of Acknowledgement-Data - only the user agent.