IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Webpush] Niceness or urgency of messages #28

Brian Raymor <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com> Tue, 23 February 2016 00:42 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 43E021B2FC8 for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Feb 2016 16:42:51 -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 9hYHHbG9GFAg for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Feb 2016 16:42:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1bon0770.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::1:770]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 210D31B2DC6 for <webpush@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Feb 2016 16:42:46 -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=WmBmOt70p8D4SzAeCzwmbEbgowm775FjhAcDa1ad49Y=; b=ds2SKiVRV403Q9gdZX8pHbY8OMfggnp4iaO9khqGedmQ7HYCq0Napy/ysCu6dNSkKW4y2IYyJxVRafh3wF61KyxeRipc9XdJs1dokEY6IqbRSEXrNivrtBmp9gTXLo4M70tvWN785s6xLay4nWzpcw77aoWf48Ic1RdJ3dM/gQw=
Received: from BY2PR0301MB0647.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.160.63.14) by BY2PR0301MB0646.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.160.63.139) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.409.15; Tue, 23 Feb 2016 00:42:28 +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 15.01.0409.024; Tue, 23 Feb 2016 00:42:28 +0000
From: Brian Raymor <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [Webpush] Niceness or urgency of messages #28
Thread-Index: AdFrgAu+FvNRL8bUQpm4q78Kji7quQABytgAAAZwu/AAAmusgACKEI8g
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 00:42:27 +0000
Message-ID: <BY2PR0301MB064755DDEDD4C3A5241F356183A40@BY2PR0301MB0647.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <BY2PR0301MB064784ED9A344BB1BF50D10B83A10@BY2PR0301MB0647.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CABkgnnXMpLiXFd7EgHq1DvGQ88SAVbn=0+YFDS1FHA3pvS8P=A@mail.gmail.com> <BY2PR0301MB0647DF1FD1AA7978EC35ACD183A10@BY2PR0301MB0647.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CABkgnnXxkt8CuuQPcGgVU9cKPvzodDfQsPNH=hg8p4xPFNvCOQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnXxkt8CuuQPcGgVU9cKPvzodDfQsPNH=hg8p4xPFNvCOQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: gmail.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;gmail.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=microsoft.com;
x-originating-ip: [2601:600:8000:5a8:2073:9de4:7497:9509]
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 987c300d-299e-450f-77d7-08d33bea34bb
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BY2PR0301MB0646; 5:I99cRsfsSUcyAgeWBFdPjUTIvku1+sPhXk8dyL3VZgeJ70NjfNXkTKG2kl60J+A/NoUUqeoA1aHHuBINEA/UYQu4HJenBQKuYitSa9YuurGBCBkt//e5gCPjlPkBeOQ9ncRcw4EKyiv1vwC0i/SYHQ==; 24:ugz0mKIiL1dTY+yC5MRqi7SBRdiWUopG/MkBvY2J+WWvG71iC9Mr6Le4mGtIUtt4cFl0L/lVcaADqLB0e2i/C6wTzfS6aehmtMv24xQKIWc=
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY2PR0301MB0646;
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BY2PR0301MB06460986466C3DF017A9E42583A40@BY2PR0301MB0646.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(61425038)(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(10201501046)(3002001)(61426038)(61427038); SRVR:BY2PR0301MB0646; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY2PR0301MB0646;
x-forefront-prvs: 08617F610C
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(377454003)(24454002)(13464003)(40100003)(87936001)(122556002)(93886004)(86612001)(76576001)(76176999)(86362001)(54356999)(50986999)(99286002)(11100500001)(5005710100001)(1220700001)(10290500002)(10400500002)(5004730100002)(33656002)(8990500004)(1096002)(5008740100001)(102836003)(6116002)(586003)(4326007)(7110500001)(74316001)(15975445007)(3660700001)(3280700002)(189998001)(15650500001)(110136002)(19580395003)(5001960100002)(19580405001)(2950100001)(2906002)(5002640100001)(2900100001)(10710500007)(2420400007)(5003600100002)(77096005)(92566002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2PR0301MB0646; H:BY2PR0301MB0647.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en;
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 23 Feb 2016 00:42:27.9959 (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: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/webpush/D5ty2n7UogJ5KWW13OB0kxalbRM>
Cc: "webpush@ietf.org" <webpush@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Webpush] Niceness or urgency of messages #28
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, 23 Feb 2016 00:42:51 -0000

I've updated the pull request with Martin's feedback.

Please let me know if there's further feedback to incorporate.

...Brian

-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Thomson [mailto:martin.thomson@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 10:48 PM
To: Brian Raymor <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com>
Cc: webpush@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Webpush] Niceness or urgency of messages #28

Ordering is easy: define the order.

On 19 February 2016 at 22:00, Brian Raymor <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com> wrote:
> but this provoked similar concerns about the need for "explicit statement[s] about the ordering of these values" and:
>
>     "This constant use of specific English words rather than numeric values is
>     causing the protocol and its processing to become less efficient and is
>     leading to complications in the definition ..."
>
>      http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sip/current/msg01441.html
>
> Unfortunately, I could not find a response for the rest of the discussion. I'm definitely open to suggestions about the best way to ensure that this is clear to implementers.

That is usually a sign that the mail was not taken seriously.  We use
string-based enumerations all the time today.  They have great
extensibility properties, they read well (though mostly for English
speakers, I will conceded), and they don't cost any significant amount
to implement.

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email