IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Webpush] WGLC for draft-ietf-webpush-protocol-05

Richard Maher <maherrj@googlemail.com> Tue, 17 May 2016 01:50 UTC

Return-Path: <maherrj@googlemail.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 4865D12DB43 for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 May 2016 18:50:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, 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=googlemail.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 Bgtl2D3Ky9iy for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 May 2016 18:50:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qg0-x22f.google.com (mail-qg0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::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 7C98D12DB41 for <webpush@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 May 2016 18:50:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qg0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id w36so1056359qge.3 for <webpush@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 May 2016 18:50:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=GMzKqfUUXf05IkcoAtbpbUxK+yBl4EGZVt4ovZ3n6dQ=; b=z6jgl/GVcN64aaFBKI9VmCYEWOpaNA1TlarwtmYXM11xgF3OmZ+hRnuH6ixWMDq3aF CN6SwSUst2rnqvPg4jcT1WNQGayU12sG2drhJWqUleDE8WRBp2v6uxbUqFanQwvOgQPU fNAmHpaJ6FPJzHRxwSPzn3HctkHkWbkiE33SRU0ZhQe0UuksFcXZFTuvhNrUPnpMEQch Y3rR6zcT2U9B7TlmrMBw1SudvxPrFXWCBYehLtw0G1jGhfWLkmsxm7hFu6/X6W1Slsxy 1MXOdhUGk+AOd7BTtq+DNsBgr50hc7FS5u/RcFzgWAqTpKZWt9O4Rg+Lk3+6HngqBd50 hIZg==
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:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=GMzKqfUUXf05IkcoAtbpbUxK+yBl4EGZVt4ovZ3n6dQ=; b=dE+26/+ermpv6CmfFNfZ6jfzF+1yC9ZtHs2TNIi0Tsl9pog0YGkEQA4E8BlljXGcMv Rh8XM/IOk5bwhpyvx3c3RZX+mB43Dxoon8enujqbVfj2a1s9eVWfsvrqdnyO72UzrL6p BSh5S8SjoPyHgqkirhf2UA5LvZyB0KgOtCCYRNyQnRodAZAOAAyubCW+ZDriUzHR0Y7x jWOV04w1XhcyzX5e797LwHqvISaVb2mwgDGly9T4xTM/xuVwtSCDxjD4+mD+3XwlpF9M Mx/rPG+7u+zfvl3iAkPuQmuItBI8okskIGiT2s/um0yoF8uuCVsYNL9Xm2rC98+LjSRg z5og==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FUMvu9x9q1hYNa87LgZKvTl9jiR4azHMsIbfFWE9OnkGvXQVemYGFjH/EIwCBSkP8ZKRxpbTTKnOgjzBQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.140.134.134 with SMTP id 128mr20787073qhg.63.1463449813610; Mon, 16 May 2016 18:50:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.55.104.194 with HTTP; Mon, 16 May 2016 18:50:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <DA2216E6-CE23-47A0-AA7A-5E19DAF043AF@ntt-at.com>
References: <DA2216E6-CE23-47A0-AA7A-5E19DAF043AF@ntt-at.com>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 09:50:13 +0800
Message-ID: <CABvL1xrKExY4FXXmNogGKq2=PUd5HtZed09BOW1h33TXE79PNA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Richard Maher <maherrj@googlemail.com>
To: Shida Schubert <shida@ntt-at.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1136f988497b6c0532fff6c6
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/webpush/aOgLnxo30S0q3_kUs9xfQAv7yBs>
Cc: webpush@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Webpush] WGLC for draft-ietf-webpush-protocol-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: Tue, 17 May 2016 01:50:21 -0000

"5.4 Updating Push Messages" is based on the misconception that "Topics"
are "Collapse Keys". The standard as proposed has been superseded by event
on the ground by established, successful, and more importantly scalable
solutions: -

Google Cloud Messaging: -
https://developers.google.com/cloud-messaging/topic-messaging

Azure Notification Hubs: -

https://blogs.windows.com/buildingapps/2013/09/16/delivering-push-notifications-to-millions-of-devices-with-windows-azure-notification-hubs/

Whether the Topics are identified via HTTP headers or JSON Tokens is the
only moot point. What is clear is that the proposed protocol attempts to
conflate the Topic and Collapse Key features: -
https://developers.google.com/cloud-messaging/concept-options#collapsible_and_non-collapsible_messages

The fact that quintessential Push Notification feature "Broadcasting" has
been descoped from this protocol must be sufficient to reject the proposal.

Please do not make the same mistake that you made with Geofences. IETF and
W3C credibility has already suffered enough.

On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 2:32 AM, Shida Schubert <shida@ntt-at.com> wrote:

> All;
>
> As discussed at the IETF 95, as last issue surrounding the subscription
> re-use is addressed, we are starting a Working Group Last Call for the
> webpush protocol.
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-webpush-protocol-05
>
> If you have any issues or questions regarding the draft please submit it
> to the list, when raising issues please provide constructive resolution
> when possible.
>
> Please acknowledge on the list even when you are content/happy with the
> status of the draft.
>
> The Working Group Last Call will end on June 6th (3 weeks).
>
> Shida
> As co-chair
>
> _______________________________________________
> Webpush mailing list
> Webpush@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webpush
>
>

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email