IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Webpush] Receipt subscription follow-up

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Wed, 27 April 2016 14:41 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: webpush@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: webpush@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6872812D835 for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Apr 2016 07:41:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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] 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 BRdihMnF7eGA for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Apr 2016 07:41:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ig0-x231.google.com (mail-ig0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9CD9312D827 for <webpush@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Apr 2016 07:41:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ig0-x231.google.com with SMTP id bi2so129798327igb.0 for <webpush@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Apr 2016 07:41:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=H0WyOefOa+pteBxpfQEbz8DeAZ9srkaF+BDSIL27Xvo=; b=JFsGRZvO+wyfoqB7enA1rZDvormskfEdmKPd2K/AxeI9Vsn9ykI0Gc4iBPQn6FtlGZ /32/eChWWWS/mBduysEwc1BAmsEpbJqGTX/ljXc7lOzjhRfJW7Fq4gWx4WUudeivboTZ JWHSSdYcIYcXgT6mRzPu0f+U1l88oLlXOb+Q/0zjRXP6jPoxLyJReaCxTnG3uGwhKtE1 PaCXZYWZcOI6DWkUDCSPPKQwuU2Ljx3PUjHkPG7xUh9Nta2Y1WrzGCi5k0ZD9+JobsM4 YsxafQXY8TOU0qHrLfFhY3WceV1KYSOB7zj/c3wXc0hLvW4s5KG9jnrDN+2f4b6SOLNj 9iQA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=H0WyOefOa+pteBxpfQEbz8DeAZ9srkaF+BDSIL27Xvo=; b=ZtCl6SxEm9zVuP/B/72C855WiDYQldRamwf7ViVA5nBOakDAp5E+T8kFvQ983UZnHB BHBk1HKfB4zyfsxwg47+2bknNeD+xJeqpv3Nt7+90la2AWoTatdZjUdxF75ynaCzRpjA vd0gyJtRnReiQeXuhk8XXyCLY5PrZkyKbiq48Jke+jQ8+CBOj0T9dP+H0Jb2zSpVZX2X ndYgPDPcGLNcyw7n8O2FX1iqKO5RThtyzl378ASOBjw72dlruwTLf79l7/kpV9mQn85i L5oQ/Q+tHvGhZZdu4Qhw/Z66xB1PTVJ/WAJydDougqJ7tw+3XqG0aHrFD16bwjf0eZPz 6yHg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FVCgENEcYEvD4LWJj9fw2N39s1TsLSgN34N8d3WgS/c+oOwiUpPMs3I0GbONe3gSz3PmNctcxaQprREQg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.101.169 with SMTP id fh9mr27436230igb.58.1461768095013; Wed, 27 Apr 2016 07:41:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.36.43.82 with HTTP; Wed, 27 Apr 2016 07:41:34 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAP8-Fqkuubb7=ndSCj2=A4-s3TAEwCp1UgELgfO-SUPf3-FpYg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABkgnnXKDZvLWxkhFP0R4jW=ZyFwqiqQREFA5BFKH9i4PQCmyA@mail.gmail.com> <CO2PR03MB24076724ECF95BDBB9B83E0F83640@CO2PR03MB2407.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CAP8-Fqk8p1HkbJkB60UoE=jeQPa9CKorgc8kqSF7sUMS3FcAfQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnU_jnSuUX7TC+qy2SwteU1tW9DEAb0uoHmhOcYNQaYuvw@mail.gmail.com> <CAP8-Fqkuubb7=ndSCj2=A4-s3TAEwCp1UgELgfO-SUPf3-FpYg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 00:41:34 +1000
Message-ID: <CABkgnnWvaz0QqqN0wApQqL02AHpcsNViuKyUV0cESWqWm0CZ3Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: Costin Manolache <costin@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/webpush/8D31CHQt6bbySu_mxIdUYQyvMHk>
Cc: Brian Raymor <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com>, "webpush@ietf.org" <webpush@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Webpush] Receipt subscription follow-up
X-BeenThere: webpush@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 14:41:37 -0000

On 28 April 2016 at 00:35, Costin Manolache <costin@gmail.com> wrote:
> How does the HTTP/2 flow control window apply to push promises ?

It might not have any effect given that flow control only affects
payloads and there isn't likely to be a payload.

I agree that the DELETE response is redundant, but it's not an
inordinate burden.

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email