IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Webpush] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-webpush-protocol-11: (with COMMENT)

Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> Fri, 14 October 2016 10:38 UTC

Return-Path: <bclaise@cisco.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 68803129486; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 03:38:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -17.518
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.518 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_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.996, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 X7mQRwW5Ht2c; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 03:38:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-4.cisco.com (aer-iport-4.cisco.com [173.38.203.54]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65FE312970E; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 03:38:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1154; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1476441519; x=1477651119; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=+dKFPfLdmI5RWKK4Vs96WgmA3Q/X5RVlrpdurOLMWAE=; b=F3xG3Icm+2zxrs9U9HjdtbFvsKII7BycBU9CSRsRQaiWnodUHKICwJ7g turMDKqLOd86ngYu8gkCxRyPOQ+gElmoGsoseaGGorgMibnGS9AR4LWqM DC0QSTXuufznFD0P5rqhIq+gn9u+qaJUmHfL88AufyJTcXXSguTPwMfIY Y=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CnAQAitQBY/xbLJq1cGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBBwEBAQEBgzwBAQEBAXQqUo00lwWSKYIPggiGIgKCSRQBAgEBAQEBAQFeJ4R?= =?us-ascii?q?iAQEEIxVBEAsYAgImAgJXBg0GAgEBiE62Io0RAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEhg?= =?us-ascii?q?QeFNoF9CIJQh0uCWwEEmgaQAIlphgyJKYNQg38eNkQGCIMvgTw8NIg1AQEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.31,344,1473120000"; d="scan'208";a="649215139"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-1.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Oct 2016 10:38:36 +0000
Received: from [10.60.67.85] (ams-bclaise-8914.cisco.com [10.60.67.85]) by aer-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u9EAcZtK031504; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 10:38:36 GMT
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
References: <147636581973.2847.16077617885564526707.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CABkgnnUwzFrbLbtf7Sbq2vG1U_tFd1++_K04eOL=x1d1cyeOng@mail.gmail.com>
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <5cf1e37d-3863-a17b-ccfd-6129fd3ccf05@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 12:38:35 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnUwzFrbLbtf7Sbq2vG1U_tFd1++_K04eOL=x1d1cyeOng@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/webpush/SZNo-7DZ195xAf3YndL3ckR7TJM>
Cc: Shida Schubert <shida@ntt-at.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-webpush-protocol@ietf.org, dromasca@gmail.com, webpush-chairs@ietf.org, "webpush@ietf.org" <webpush@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Webpush] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-webpush-protocol-11: (with COMMENT)
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: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 10:38:41 -0000

Martin,

Here is the high level message: no show stopper here from my 
perspective, but from an OPS point of view it could be better documented.

Regards, Benoit
> On 14 October 2016 at 00:36, Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> wrote:
>> Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for
>> draft-ietf-webpush-protocol-11: No Objection
> [...]
>> Here is Dan Romascanu's OPS DIR review:
> I have confess, I don't see an awful lot of actionable material in
> this review.  I worry that RFC 5706 isn't an entirely appropriate
> template for a review of this sort of thing.  I will concede that the
> level of consistency across the industry when it comes to managing and
> operating HTTP servers and services is almost uniformly inconsistent.
>
> Dan does observe that the draft doesn't mention that typical HTTP
> operational practices apply; it was my understanding that this was
> assumed to be obvious enough to omit.
>
> (I'm happy to have a more involved conversation about operational and
> management concerns with push services, but it's probably something
> that is better done with a different CC list.)
> .
>

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email