IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Webpush] Status for webpush-05 WGLC

Brian Raymor <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com> Mon, 06 June 2016 21:16 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 B0FB012D5BC for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Jun 2016 14:16:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 JPuXHgSm4yh9 for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Jun 2016 14:15:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1bon0726.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::1:726]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7247E12B00D for <webpush@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Jun 2016 14:15:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=rsVy2NNJ+nBHe5fcYwzCnotjBx7821VVVogTn69wQRc=; b=NK1iy2h41WFR9NFWl2f3YYVn3PQgUH2QEryP3OJ1iuszburCz77hhr9FV/xLwIcVBK+T5ctWGA2wE2jMkTYb9079+O/4wMsLvi+dYFamGN4ccxxRt3GrKKdht34X+/fiXsEWeW0FsAWqElYMxosRcQi8YShBMEo42Vg7Rqr2iDc=
Received: from CO2PR03MB2407.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.166.93.137) by CO2PR03MB2408.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.166.93.138) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.506.9; Mon, 6 Jun 2016 21:15:31 +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 15.01.0506.016; Mon, 6 Jun 2016 21:15:31 +0000
From: Brian Raymor <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com>
To: "webpush@ietf.org" <webpush@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Status for webpush-05 WGLC
Thread-Index: AdHAOCd7uxTXYP7bRPSDqvdAJMja2A==
Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2016 21:15:30 +0000
Message-ID: <CO2PR03MB2407F25BA3A3548DB9314C8E835C0@CO2PR03MB2407.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com;
x-originating-ip: [24.16.23.27]
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: e9f706b6-8a33-4f11-40e7-08d38e4fb0f7
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; CO2PR03MB2408; 5:YVcu9vT/C7sddxPyZ2yoNAFQ6bSMzNzb2xwkMG0RWSNw0WU1V5nLlkLjZ7b2sRyfDiRCaPMLVapX+pwb9nByjkxwCNbOyj0/cO91ZiZhsSTtHercn8NSqt/TvtVvk6BI74AWucVGjtMEmRyaE7Fnww==; 24:Fqnr+GYxvUigfJyADUj7NmJCDS2uB/rYDzS/92YnW3yorWnieQoShuB7IxiCS0LO6WDJPW5mi0zEXJcfbODvKbfsPu7V9qSCtufo0u1YpuA=; 7:p3zAWp7cjbCIqHe+K9cc3lRaoE6eeRw8y7CUrRNGuWH7nvBOkNcDinUVkek4y19JT2JZEJx4rY/C8kPVM1F/zLuCXyOJk+NMqBTAm9aiDRBA8JOWJEREkOyQ358Byn4ywO2kw1PsDgaNg4lqBnNiBhj7zEVWki7qkYZ/1EJpzAy8R3KsrNW8JGjxjcIQzeElZGERjjGYCB5SqP4ViNQSUSJmwZUWTUa2gP/l84K0u1ev2qkftZdR21EC6VZJT5tb
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:CO2PR03MB2408;
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <CO2PR03MB24081DCDA6A397F6092EBB7B835C0@CO2PR03MB2408.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(166708455590820)(100405760836317)(21748063052155);
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(61425038)(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(10201501046)(3002001)(6055026)(61426038)(61427038); SRVR:CO2PR03MB2408; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:CO2PR03MB2408;
x-forefront-prvs: 096507C068
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(189002)(199003)(107886002)(8990500004)(10290500002)(86362001)(10400500002)(5008740100001)(97736004)(76576001)(68736007)(110136002)(19580395003)(5630700001)(5640700001)(3660700001)(189998001)(3280700002)(19300405004)(2501003)(9686002)(5005710100001)(50986999)(74316001)(2906002)(102836003)(790700001)(92566002)(450100001)(15975445007)(77096005)(2900100001)(229853001)(122556002)(81156014)(81166006)(1730700003)(8676002)(106356001)(8936002)(66066001)(105586002)(6116002)(3846002)(101416001)(10090500001)(54356999)(19625215002)(11100500001)(2351001)(5004730100002)(5002640100001)(16236675004)(5003600100002)(86612001)(586003)(99286002)(33656002)(87936001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:CO2PR03MB2408; H:CO2PR03MB2407.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: microsoft.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_CO2PR03MB2407F25BA3A3548DB9314C8E835C0CO2PR03MB2407namp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 06 Jun 2016 21:15:30.9270 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CO2PR03MB2408
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/webpush/ELh6Vm4sxDskl7beE77KItOuXg0>
Subject: [Webpush] Status for webpush-05 WGLC
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: Mon, 06 Jun 2016 21:16:02 -0000

I really appreciate all the detailed reading and thought that went into the feedback.

Thanks for helping to improve the draft.



Going forward, I would make one small request. Could we use separate mail subjects

for separate topics? It's a bit difficult to track conversations when all the subject lines are

"Non-blocking comments on -05" ;-) That said, if I've missed capturing or addressing your

issue, please let me know.



My goal is to publish webpush-06 on or before 6/13 if consensus is reached. We have until 7/8

to publish further drafts for IETF96.



These open issues need more working group discussion:



*  Adds that receipt support is mandatory.

https://github.com/webpush-wg/webpush-protocol/pull/104



Receipts have been required since the -00 draft from July 2015 - https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-webpush-protocol-00#section-6.2



Related threads on the mailing list:

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/webpush/current/msg00565.html

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/webpush/current/msg00573.html



*  Allow push service to reject messages < 4K

https://github.com/webpush-wg/webpush-protocol/issues/109



Related thread on the mailing list:

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/webpush/current/msg00572.html





These open issues are more editorial in nature:



*  Optional message encryption and push message examples

Issue: https://github.com/webpush-wg/webpush-protocol/issues/106

PR: https://github.com/webpush-wg/webpush-protocol/pull/107



When we added "The ciphertext of the push message is included in the body of the request." during WGLC, the examples

no longer matched the description. I'm leaning towards clear text examples for clarity with a pointer to an example

of encrypted content in Martin's optional draft.



*  Make it a bit more obvious which is the send resource.

https://github.com/webpush-wg/webpush-protocol/pull/105



Costin writes - "push resource" is confusing me every time - "push" is used in all other resources.

Please share your suggestions in the PR.



*  proxy uc

https://github.com/webpush-wg/webpush-protocol/pull/96



Herve provided further clarification for the Canon scenarios. Costin has pending

feedback that needs to be addressed.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email