Re: [Webpush] Message update PR

Costin Manolache <costin@gmail.com> Mon, 11 January 2016 17:00 UTC

Return-Path: <costin@gmail.com>
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 16AB01A8ABB for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 09:00:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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, HTML_MESSAGE=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 VukqeQA5z1St for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 09:00:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-oi0-x236.google.com (mail-oi0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::236]) (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 AA5891A8AC0 for <webpush@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 09:00:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-oi0-x236.google.com with SMTP id w75so23838953oie.0 for <webpush@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 09:00:43 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=e2hIQT9nZ5sY6HR06QtHcdZmOrWxZme+RrSuoDPb6g0=; b=MAYJ7FDjh9B1c9P9uQP5udS3/jz3OvRc3FJDqEf0fLIJRQyFM4tmO/R93MJMASPQqT oShH6B+TPAWgjUBy/unehR3xlls8MmzqeF1ari+siUwEQwKCaAa3Vi2HXG9jsX4PqpAv u8hI0XmuYh/aF56kYnWtYSKuQReC4bi9dWBhKIpnG6nPnloEGVjrtyEoA61iVY/9irna /mMhLBDtyrEkmBFLWfExUvLXJ3kb/VTDFuINIm/Sr6526gmYHTYXIaUqOfBBrZEzgpvs nwnTYl19jukeAP06d0iTwTI6jQgcTaQrfUmOVKAaoBX8NM+cEXyGpEQg7bw4aIuQ4V8y X0XA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.202.204.136 with SMTP id c130mr91921203oig.93.1452531643034; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 09:00:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.76.8.74 with HTTP; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 09:00:42 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <BY2PR0301MB06470F90FC2A3801FEB0917983F70@BY2PR0301MB0647.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CABkgnnX-oO5yc58zp3CzLhsp8UQv_QW6RZw_xEPOd9nUukCoCg@mail.gmail.com> <BY2PR0301MB06470F90FC2A3801FEB0917983F70@BY2PR0301MB0647.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 17:00:42 +0000
Message-ID: <CAP8-FqkTkKSQHEHz=HREjkgAd_PuiUcEMLdTJT+fTY4uf_p0Rg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Costin Manolache <costin@gmail.com>
To: Brian Raymor <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1137b1129bba49052911e031
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/webpush/ZQs7X4IegcpNEkMJfoIn10Lbd7w>
Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, "webpush@ietf.org" <webpush@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Webpush] Message update PR
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: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 17:00:46 -0000

- +1 in general

- Doubts about the name "Topic" - many pubsub users will be confused, it is
not really a topic,
just a key

-  We may relax the '4 collapse keys' limit for GCM, shouldn't be a problem
for webpush.

Can we change a bit the wording to allow some optimizations we do: a
message with topic (collapse
key) may be optimized for 'sync usage' - i.e. even if the device is online,
if push service detects
frequent messages in a topic (for example user receives lots of email) it
may delay and collapse
messages. I.e. not only " If the user agent is offline".

Also I would prefer (for implementation purpose) a simpler ID syntax
instead of quoted string.
It's going to be a database key, short an unambiguous seems better. URI
path component would
be nice.

Finally, a more generic approach would be to allow the sender to specify a
MessageID - than
multiple messages with the same ID could override each other ( identical
with topic ), but the main
benefit is that senders will avoid a lookup and mapping push-service IDs to
their internal IDs in
acks. Push service can internally combine the subscription ID with the
sender-provided message ID.


Costin

On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 1:10 AM, Brian Raymor <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com>
wrote:

> Is there any further feedback for Martin's pull request below?
>
> Thanks,
> ...Brian
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Webpush [mailto:webpush-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Martin
> Thomson
> Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 1:00 PM
> To: webpush@ietf.org
> Subject: [Webpush] Message update PR
>
> https://github.com/webpush-wg/webpush-protocol/pull/62
>
> The above pull request and commit is the substance of what we
> discussed in Yokohama regarding push message updates.  This proposes a
> new header field, Topic, which can be added to a push message.
>
> This doesn't really replace messages in the same way that the last one
> does.  Instead, it causes the old message to be acknowledged/deleted
> at the same time that the new message is created.  This avoids all the
> nasty race conditions we discussed at the meeting.  If the old message
> is being delivered, then this causes it to be acknowledged early;
> since acknowledgment is idempotent, there are no race conditions.
>
> --Martin
>
> _______________________________________________
> Webpush mailing list
> Webpush@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webpush
>
> _______________________________________________
> Webpush mailing list
> Webpush@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webpush
>