[Webpush] Delivery receipts support

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Fri, 03 June 2016 23:19 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@gmail.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 5618012D511 for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Jun 2016 16:19:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 CxoneRADR2y0 for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Jun 2016 16:19:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk0-x22c.google.com (mail-qk0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22c]) (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 01ED312D8D0 for <webpush@ietf.org>; Fri, 3 Jun 2016 16:19:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id p22so1846538qka.2 for <webpush@ietf.org>; Fri, 03 Jun 2016 16:19:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=+cCwV9XAsy7+lmbq8rQFvji7lj7tWEer93v5i8ATvkk=; b=is94WVLBkIYSLEKrGb3ZP2PP4GGcR7cilqWti5PPyJSmvg6moq0I6DDyJtjTypvmYy Glh20sbmDMKQMG46Rz4jowv41XYo3kiVHY25cHrs1nX5ALF9j6qXQzARNkV+TfFZj7ea a4G94MDIsnKcW8tOd3aIIrevzdLCeGyA18clDmliC68U1Vn1Xd7nkVl69gC6Htx7H7bT fYX/XKFP2aj72AfWw79nbb/EeQojwx32zdskiPbcI7yWiWxHeYnpJZX21HrVgjplPO6t DTDJifW9z9D4mLd4/XTwhtkl9kCu4PVly9ZoHEpbrogLdwMg+CUk0THb4nQhh5GPriT9 NL9g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=+cCwV9XAsy7+lmbq8rQFvji7lj7tWEer93v5i8ATvkk=; b=Jv9SBj+bAxq+36oUObADw4VQFg0ZVSR/rShoG1Ffmz05C2ILu2uB2IpaO4Tlls0LgB YWGzd/ZUcNL4SMDZ2tTCR5RId3FdV5iMGvwa9EKBXhpVprAPplisz6tY25OLtPLFL0N2 Gf6ni9qrL/sfgixh0ba3efzfyVTtY0LjlsyV5gWBvHxbFuyokZVF5hwUEN/PHVKQ4/gh MXqs1MxNWFYfDRe5RuPBsBN/GKUdWt69hKjUvIu1JLvnfDLOUDMUZKKn/JPG1/LHAnHZ yz9bnBgRrMadeTKcWv1dr1i7h944X9OKdJ3DonjY9KDrf+jQlrqJEKXB840ucgZtfNrF Q7gg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tK6YV5WGFUwMMCLMRpfB8Tptn+TLxDGLk7Jly4NJtuwD5o2hYwbx4wIFFdHN3HamTuOE9sRuoy0MIqruw==
X-Received: by 10.55.20.208 with SMTP id 77mr5737364qku.124.1464995977849; Fri, 03 Jun 2016 16:19:37 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.140.104.110 with HTTP; Fri, 3 Jun 2016 16:19:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2016 09:19:37 +1000
Message-ID: <CABkgnnWeVS7Kp2Sm_5yLp-5yZoc6fVXWpV=sFdz2VZPHGkmkbQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "webpush@ietf.org" <webpush@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/webpush/YTjNitfX58n3jx46EHk2xndUY9w>
Subject: [Webpush] Delivery receipts support
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, 03 Jun 2016 23:19:41 -0000

Costin (on github) said:
> Since we have open issues with receipts - can we not make it mandatory ? It's very unlikely all implementations will be able to support the receipts any time soon, at least not as push promises.

We discussed this in the past.  At that time, we decided to make
support of delivery receipts mandatory.  Do people want to reopen that
issue?

Note that I don't believe that any implementation currently supports
receipts.  I had expected that to be a temporary situation, but if
people expect that this will be a problem, now would be a good time to
hear of it.