IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Webpush] Message expiration (TTL) and Negative Acknowledgements

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Thu, 15 October 2015 17:10 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@gmail.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 B23DC1ACD38 for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 10:10:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 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, 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 k3xS29fKh3RZ for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 10:10:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yk0-x22c.google.com (mail-yk0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::22c]) (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 6DB9B1ACD22 for <webpush@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 10:10:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ykfy204 with SMTP id y204so61066831ykf.1 for <webpush@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 10:10:51 -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:content-type; bh=+UbgLeOGCZ/uq81nOWk6bUiNv6+VuCDdiyFthoya4aU=; b=jRC8Ng9h+MwbUZx80CEGvhQUVg9dM165P12rtiIFYa8DpNeAX7QcqrYLwYQUkAhAXz KgnKgd2AmqZw7F7HHzghWrf5fkRr5NuP0DJLGPuY8htWwIHQ6sBF64rnywIfGP6xuMY/ d0y+N9B5w0wMzYCr2KFJU+or8Co3geK34zLO2TWCaAtEBfXpqctCstuTyK4I1dJMwLcG kbhCmgfs7q73aWTRo/4ZR6zW9ARQ81rYqf7d/cFu1I+NS0qtJWs87CffGotbqpww4/Vu n2pcvgYYZlEi1iANj4yx58G9Ag12L6J/cRHrBoDLP04ZZXIOucyzAYEMglHQ8hS3yTY4 ElgQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.129.132.80 with SMTP id u77mr7479268ywf.187.1444929051737; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 10:10:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.13.230.78 with HTTP; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 10:10:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABp8EuLoOx_Vda_A+6bcs27q3erRR0+eHWC0DS_JB3fzgoniow@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BY2PR0301MB0647111FCF5845E3AA0C244583300@BY2PR0301MB0647.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CABkgnnUs_S6aRpTi6H5+d4xpuU1+2G1OKmWCxzczk+DYDWZGSQ@mail.gmail.com> <BY2PR0301MB0647EAE2174E1103EF59A2A083300@BY2PR0301MB0647.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CABkgnnUOcuK6p2C5WDaS==nwcYMfnpu1jXKj8oo31css7CFJNg@mail.gmail.com> <561EC47C.4090803@mozilla.com> <CABkgnnUHF1Z0expqJmggyYxnJm-EUU5x97JUo7=NhjhRDUVWvA@mail.gmail.com> <561ED106.8030806@mozilla.com> <CABp8EuLoOx_Vda_A+6bcs27q3erRR0+eHWC0DS_JB3fzgoniow@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 10:10:51 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnVVBsto0pucik0-6F0h7v9FG_uWoPH0XL8snNG_M6Z7qA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: Benjamin Bangert <bbangert@mozilla.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/webpush/8J-E1cXa2hIaNLogWyMhcHOtZmo>
Cc: jr conlin <jconlin@mozilla.com>, "webpush@ietf.org" <webpush@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Webpush] Message expiration (TTL) and Negative Acknowledgements
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: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 17:10:53 -0000

On 15 October 2015 at 09:07, Benjamin Bangert <bbangert@mozilla.com> wrote:
> What steps are being taken with NACK's to ensure an app-server doesn't do
> something like this? Is there going to be some status code or something to
> indicate that these messages shouldn't be retried for some period of time?
>
> Or is it going to be up to a Push Service to try and detect these loops, and
> when they occur, the Push Service is just going to have to fully expire all
> the clients subscriptions to stop the loop?


What steps do you think are appropriate.  I'd have to think some more
on it, but I think that the only reasonable option is to have the push
service do something.  We could recommend the use of Retry-After on
nacks.

Other than that, I guess that this is something the push service needs
to handle.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email