IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Webpush] Non-blocking comments on -05

Brian Raymor <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com> Thu, 02 June 2016 23:00 UTC

Return-Path: <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.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 8275212D8F5 for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 16:00:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.003
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.003 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=microsoft.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 DrbKcisgsddQ for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 16:00:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2on0139.outbound.protection.outlook.com [65.55.169.139]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98CA912D0C5 for <webpush@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 16:00:13 -0700 (PDT)
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=aoZ6ZZvjOyzk+R23LMA8pbYpNkFBbNl06P5MrwK+KDY=; b=OAxKp7MHL+FUPAXScb7K7710BcvcRK9RyFMIoBAFg+tLPDiFI2CIl0ndb0Rl52QonQ6i5TsnLm1urjPQExT5vzaIf602NX0IMCD332uhE1nm3O+pvOb4SOPQH3bF5LOme1YQufi4/2ypeEdpOS9FI+VNZgy/nSFdqH7Pwe//+uE=
Received: from CO2PR03MB2407.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.166.93.137) by CO2PR03MB2405.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.166.93.135) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.506.9; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 23:00:11 +0000
Received: from CO2PR03MB2407.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.166.93.137]) by CO2PR03MB2407.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.166.93.137]) with mapi id 15.01.0506.011; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 23:00:11 +0000
From: Brian Raymor <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com>
To: Kit Cambridge <kcambridge@mozilla.com>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [Webpush] Non-blocking comments on -05
Thread-Index: AQHRu3RQwDJq8LaJ6EaFkMQ0Dd4KCZ/Uf30AgADyW4CAAFBvAIABBhjw
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 23:00:10 +0000
Message-ID: <CO2PR03MB24072F9FE41E8C9D9581DB5683580@CO2PR03MB2407.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CALt3x6=_yc9TegOut_g+6W5fvhP7sfW+_gwRZnEVFA5PNgER6Q@mail.gmail.com> <6af49c2baf1b4e4f884b812d573b947e@Antiope.crf.canon.fr> <CABkgnnWebfxnPOLMXK+n+2G=c8DOG4Eb4AWMsWXJmmdnE4pUwg@mail.gmail.com> <989D9268-BE9A-47F7-9181-C0F323D1DA1F@mozilla.com>
In-Reply-To: <989D9268-BE9A-47F7-9181-C0F323D1DA1F@mozilla.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: mozilla.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;mozilla.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=microsoft.com;
x-originating-ip: [24.16.23.27]
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 7ed567f9-6611-47c2-d293-08d38b39a673
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; CO2PR03MB2405; 5:FCuPaX9WX1JJlWoscWUGC0nFp8/LaiJU8VSXEiriKMRrZx7y8OFKt8KMILeHcuA5Dvr9RLbZ2/re2c6MvBveNt/IrYx5RqUAtfmccGIHH2d68jSR4XAzVLGlvHTx7iY0vAVAWpliS6in3fN+PJH36A==; 24:DOXwG9cGoOSJClq/VRyXC+HD3rfgal8BKzKQGd/8I0JlA7QyPTDRSFCixG1VW7zVHIrSH0TNkrR4jDVjg5W75WARRT5N2kHqZVHkc6MpzK8=; 7:Y16tI6a3ir96uKNoMijBgcx5Sr4kOJh12MkmYasziYAB/kpL/UwcKrQZ7MKir45cOt/+/5FTTH1k/wfPwvarIVU6tzRN/rWBcegnHsBqlxLiUUTbwYfkYAR4apOjccvxpmE8ldrgiB1KwPLe4Imozcr9g42Xww9YLL4VP7FqZayB8Rl04pFrTAsUrJu6db/zNem/LIrMUNYqnK6zS7KXjx0a6AeLWS7+c4Lpw+k5cDc=
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:CO2PR03MB2405;
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <CO2PR03MB240560F4B2FA8987A97A0CAB83580@CO2PR03MB2405.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(158342451672863)(120809045254105)(166708455590820);
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(61425038)(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(10201501046)(3002001)(6055026)(61426038)(61427038); SRVR:CO2PR03MB2405; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:CO2PR03MB2405;
x-forefront-prvs: 0961DF5286
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(51914003)(377454003)(24454002)(66066001)(50986999)(76576001)(76176999)(3280700002)(54356999)(33656002)(2900100001)(74316001)(9686002)(4326007)(3660700001)(586003)(93886004)(102836003)(6116002)(2906002)(3846002)(2950100001)(5003600100002)(122556002)(10090500001)(5002640100001)(19580395003)(11100500001)(189998001)(81166006)(86362001)(10290500002)(77096005)(15975445007)(8936002)(5008740100001)(8676002)(106116001)(99286002)(5005710100001)(10400500002)(5001770100001)(19580405001)(5004730100002)(87936001)(92566002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:CO2PR03MB2405; H:CO2PR03MB2407.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: 02 Jun 2016 23:00:10.8720 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CO2PR03MB2405
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/webpush/ClH4nym1k9GTYuYwFhn3FtuYMiU>
Cc: Peter Beverloo <beverloo@google.com>, "webpush@ietf.org" <webpush@ietf.org>, RUELLAN Herve <Herve.Ruellan@crf.canon.fr>
Subject: Re: [Webpush] Non-blocking comments on -05
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: Thu, 02 Jun 2016 23:00:16 -0000

Kit - Thanks for the comments.

On Thursday, June 2, 2016 12:02 AM, Kit Cambridge <kcambridge@mozilla.com> wrote:

> Does it make sense for the push server to use a 400-class status code in a receipt to report a nack? For example, if the UA failed to decrypt the message,
> or the app threw an exception. IIUC, the spec allows 204 for successful deliveries and 410 for expired messages, but it's not clear if the PS can send other
> statuses in receipts.

Earlier, Elio proposed Acknowledgement Data for this scenario - https://github.com/webpush-wg/webpush-protocol/issues/42
 & https://github.com/webpush-wg/webpush-protocol/pull/57 - which allows the user agent to return opaque data to its application server.

This was presented and discussed at IETF 94. It was closed with an agreement to re-open if there was more customer data to justify the use cases:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-94-webpush/
 * Discuss use cases for PR #57 and account for the results in a future update

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email