IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Peter Beverloo <beverloo@google.com> Wed, 01 June 2016 13:01 UTC

Return-Path: <beverloo@google.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 A9FFE12D1BE for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Jun 2016 06:01:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.126
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.126 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_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 LzhzKd7Gb6v6 for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Jun 2016 06:01:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf0-x22f.google.com (mail-lf0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22f]) (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 AC1B812D111 for <webpush@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Jun 2016 06:01:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id w16so12297323lfd.2 for <webpush@ietf.org>; Wed, 01 Jun 2016 06:01:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=RzsFdTuuUto9RvAxii0VJC6zYp3SNvcMOHG0blo9z20=; b=eu/Vf33DvqnWonB48QlGj0o9AaL6UV4QRjBeCWCqj7NqaTXVqlbQOuN2b+j/ryXD+E 4VJeVzhC+yrOgiCzvpruSsjTS2nDuB60CpBPaS886GFqFEIKxW4ktwLCL/dozkYBmNQz 3UIqC+94LSrcob2wdMMSczchdXx9cPPllisHA93xzeKAKtatYImqbUFUwpeQnqCAY36/ nOvof7a0h4kcpknP+aVdUxKlHgSAnCI8KP0NyQnVFqlOEUFTpCf+HX3p8zO7pa74fBUK K1szPGK2MlKrNMnery0gn39+VIkeMZ1tVw3fZsOPeIeqVfavvgdO18zzQec5hVdbK0n2 K08A==
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:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=RzsFdTuuUto9RvAxii0VJC6zYp3SNvcMOHG0blo9z20=; b=Xb1pdUgOwfPg8W7svXtF/+3TM84d8iOqJeLBOVlXNq6oepvQWy4SOIKMwWfZraVZG9 lK/o/VC5LPlaQ+vFQxem+SkYWwGXqnGRO0BlX9FTt/lSTxp1sbSISp2KQefRZqMg9js9 mXQH3N2Lddq/1Of1w5emV2AOTI7tYDyv3ptz1Dsrmfeff9aE+zLp3Ddo/Eumb1v7EIow 5KaoZf7gmvscWbDli6USGFPJpxav5F0Tl4yLQeFcYjw2Wef9jBjnCPDDhURQprUxoCsN AJbeuKbjbpWycdOm8eC5Bp+TDQNRP7ryRaJ/ZorphI/57wDeS1VEZb8zI7FEjj9rSXC4 UPIQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tJoSorxcSNCHUO3s8GwaMIS7HtdvseKMFs9E1e+u0ZGiYEepPXbs76APEshctyqeeO4ha+aeT32tibW+/f6
X-Received: by 10.25.166.71 with SMTP id p68mr1670446lfe.48.1464786078784; Wed, 01 Jun 2016 06:01:18 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.25.167.82 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Jun 2016 06:01:17 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnX_HSuyX1TXt49CBvi062vpVXG_Xc4eCF4E52w8EYs3Gw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALt3x6=_yc9TegOut_g+6W5fvhP7sfW+_gwRZnEVFA5PNgER6Q@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnUn7NSrh_vpEhezaBDCxWkt3fdnw8KxHjRtAH=23Hat-A@mail.gmail.com> <CO2PR03MB240753E779A28BD536187CE783470@CO2PR03MB2407.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CABkgnnX_HSuyX1TXt49CBvi062vpVXG_Xc4eCF4E52w8EYs3Gw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Peter Beverloo <beverloo@google.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 14:01:17 +0100
Message-ID: <CALt3x6mx4itcHZKE13uE0UAEiSpiUQ=7dX9fu-jfDco5HQWU0Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11410a1ee6378f0534371568
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/webpush/QfM1R0TspRg2xXwGMpxfUREYvcg>
Cc: Brian Raymor <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com>, "webpush@ietf.org" <webpush@ietf.org>
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: Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:01:22 -0000

On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 1:56 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 1 June 2016 at 13:42, Brian Raymor <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com> wrote:
> > There was some early discussion in
> https://github.com/webpush-wg/webpush-protocol/issues/24.
> >
> > There were no major objections at the time. It just felt odd to have a
> special case for TTL=0 in comparison to TTL=1.
>
> That's right, I remember now.  Costin has said as much on the PR that
> I generated.  If Peter is OK with this explanation, I will just close
> the PR.
>

I will defer to Costin— no-change resolution works for me.

Thanks,
Peter

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email