IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Webpush] Status Code for Negative Acknowledgements #49

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Thu, 15 October 2015 07:20 UTC

Return-Path: <mnot@mnot.net>
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 730A91A0097 for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 00:20:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.602
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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 3ofwgGAZb5-S for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 00:20:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net (mxout-07.mxes.net [216.86.168.182]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 73DE21A0089 for <webpush@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 00:20:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.7] (unknown [120.149.147.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4AC9522E1F4; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 03:20:52 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <BY2PR0301MB0647A13237BC4AD8BDA37B57833E0@BY2PR0301MB0647.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 18:20:50 +1100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <CC781D01-25C5-4F47-9773-C171638BAA98@mnot.net>
References: <BY2PR0301MB0647B9C0BBAA6E4CAC9057F2833E0@BY2PR0301MB0647.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <B48B008D-0C4D-40FC-BF7B-8D090B0B97D3@mnot.net> <BY2PR0301MB0647A13237BC4AD8BDA37B57833E0@BY2PR0301MB0647.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
To: Brian Raymor <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/webpush/TWA9QXyBBCp0P8iHyvtBiTmOfuo>
Cc: "webpush@ietf.org" <webpush@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Webpush] Status Code for Negative Acknowledgements #49
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: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 07:20:57 -0000

Thanks, Brian. The re-statement of #42 is a relief; however, it sounds like there still needs to be some discussion around #49.

Cheers,


> On 15 Oct 2015, at 3:45 pm, Brian Raymor <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On October 14 2015 at 8:31 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> 
>> I'm especially concerned about suggestions in the issue to allocate "a range of
>> status codes" for this purpose.
> 
> Let me clarify. There are two issues:
> 
> https://github.com/webpush-wg/webpush-protocol/issues/49 (Status Code for Negative Acknowledgements) is related to the proposal for the 512 status code under discussion.
> 
> https://github.com/webpush-wg/webpush-protocol/issues/42 (Acknowledgement 'status codes') is the source of the confusion about "a range of status codes"? I completely agree that the title (even with those single quotes) is misleading. The intent is to NOT use HTTP status codes to return information for this scenario. If developed further, it will probably need to be a header field since it's passed in a DELETE. (It's closer in nature to the opaque diagnostic data that can be included in a HTTP/2 GOAWAY.) I've clarified the title and text in the issue to reflect our true intentions.
> 

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email