IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Webpush] Replace term 'Application server'

Costin Manolache <costin@gmail.com> Thu, 02 June 2016 15:40 UTC

Return-Path: <costin@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 5E55012D592 for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 08:40:34 -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=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 dgj1X8i18MTH for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 08:40:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x232.google.com (mail-pa0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::232]) (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 5735012D1EA for <webpush@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 08:40:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pa0-x232.google.com with SMTP id te7so3305469pab.3 for <webpush@ietf.org>; Thu, 02 Jun 2016 08:40:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=d8cqrrsA9FMNWH0rFsZ+0mnxH6L2jRsAS/e5U3KbRC4=; b=qph64vLxwgw2zG764rzZEDttpSDxmTjJ8BqhdHWQX6Xi3oulK61VqjCusgj2vQJdWi koOItosfnJb7qCNWN+vF9cEkw7WG3s1v3CLj3qcZZ0UxkspsbmlqygI/VyvUOpgGyzjm tdWbA32d0wanhTLQqLc50u9/D4o8HFEqkMd9QJT0Vjjg0Fu1PMVWWRScKlRE1qXlfjFS KYFHymgSM8pJbGe40uOQUqCJZGD0GaneaV5EC29zmMz+/ntQGd6h0unJHNgcu1XULSX7 2cNKSMowqcmkwvKtkCQyx4yaGD0WTW6YZvnzUUrzGnaqFWgag35OsKbFt1FSPgQKnM85 vyoQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=d8cqrrsA9FMNWH0rFsZ+0mnxH6L2jRsAS/e5U3KbRC4=; b=GnQHiFen7fhYFB2LkjMLVaI7uA9btybaSZ8+0azbrhBcIvIbbvXMNGHozrawtrkul/ wMmVT60Mbjt6gtBhSAAm74RJm7eSTdU1yaJiKO1Rm8N++ZOpVE/Krw9h82SU2bJs8o7B 5dSPl95VncJHUr0aLNwoARevsIyYpZVsL+2NxZFVeWVhVTT9u0XGM8OZCe9hhOqxFufN SFxbvJroarCHBbAvQhHAJ2Lffj4UeLa/2cyWqMXcbq1tx8tr/SQNbDj3qWbTqkZzpJi9 IB5c7MtJhDl/uU2aMkOGubXbWaiuqqMTMvmjQwqX3ZmREWin/+2FR6ehKeX7JFPhcvCk UnSQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tJEbc9Fja+nodksfeHzgGNyEgcqS45ghB8k4ectObKlgoagu3pLyQdT+Fdp2Q3wmB3PIxhP/bXWIIFe7Q==
X-Received: by 10.66.237.69 with SMTP id va5mr6449985pac.49.1464882030934; Thu, 02 Jun 2016 08:40:30 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAN+BUJp8WqDDqeAZdDjxPNF-+2pwF1ossCP3zMraKbgxE8Oq6A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAN+BUJp8WqDDqeAZdDjxPNF-+2pwF1ossCP3zMraKbgxE8Oq6A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Costin Manolache <costin@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2016 15:40:21 +0000
Message-ID: <CAP8-FqnkeJ8fk88ig+nQcz0xV46F-Cu2pf6LfoWbVcTESMCcAg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Idel Pivnitskiy <idel.pivnitskiy@gmail.com>, webpush@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113808bc17807505344d6d5d
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/webpush/h6MX_8NrDrhnv71XV5jKBTqHLsw>
Subject: Re: [Webpush] Replace term 'Application server'
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: Thu, 02 Jun 2016 15:40:34 -0000

M2M is a bit more complicated due to authentication and secrecy of push
endpoint.

Some PS will require senders to authenticate with VAPID - while others will
rely only on the
fact that AS can keep the push endpoint secret. In M2M it is very hard to
keep the
endpoints and authenticator secret - and impossible to keep the sender
private key secret.

However it is possible to extend the protocol for M2M, with a future draft
- there
are several ways. The cleanest change (IMHO) is to relax the requirement of
a single
subscription per service worker - in a M2M case there are multiple senders,
and
each will need either a different endpoint/keys ( sharing the authenticator
and encryption
keys among multiple devices defeats their purpose ), and each sender will
have a separate
VAPID key that will need to be authorized. There are other options as well,
but I think it
is cleaner to handle this in a separate document.

Costin

On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 5:33 AM Idel Pivnitskiy <idel.pivnitskiy@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Agree with Peter, that server side is not needed for communication:
>
> Nothing precludes an application from not needing a server side at all. I
>> don't think we should change the term, but perhaps we can consider
>> slightly rephrasing the definition as:
>>
>> "The component of an application that *usually* runs on a server and
>> requests the delivery of a push message."
>>
>
> Relevant commit:
> https://github.com/webpush-wg/webpush-protocol/pull/90/commits/e0222007081cbf4c96e7c285d54154840d374b6d
>
> According to the rapid growth of IoT devices, WebPush protocol could get a
> popularity for power efficient M2M communications. In this case would be
> better not to fix client-server architecture/terms and use something like
> sender/receiver (or something similar) instead of AS/UA.
>
> Best regards,
> Idel Pivnitskiy
> --
> Twitter: @idelpivnitskiy <https://twitter.com/idelpivnitskiy>
> GitHub: @idelpivnitskiy <https://github.com/idelpivnitskiy>
> _______________________________________________
> Webpush mailing list
> Webpush@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webpush
>

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email