IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Webpush] Non-blocking comments on -05

Kit Cambridge <kcambridge@mozilla.com> Thu, 09 June 2016 18:39 UTC

Return-Path: <kcambridge@mozilla.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 B950F12D913 for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 11:39:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, 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=mozilla-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 RaNdDk9YRJ0F for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 11:39:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf0-x229.google.com (mail-pf0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::229]) (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 BE19712D8F1 for <webpush@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jun 2016 11:39:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf0-x229.google.com with SMTP id c2so15386069pfa.2 for <webpush@ietf.org>; Thu, 09 Jun 2016 11:39:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mozilla-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=bfu2Utb9Kdf9HxrsIAATSKs9gSPH24onh7l/QRcuFu0=; b=Nq0a59aIV+R3GPdBYFIPIo1mhDqYPgOnanJRQK9++K2d3KrvBUE7Xj4HHBb6Yhu/5p pfOThLc/gDmrX5IlZV+fEEEvda+rVw8fD8ilDfwHgsvb5hre8QN2N58BG0oM8DZJoHQg MIDDI6e2sg/rEflwOgEVkbiEwiIxow3W5cyMrBW7OTNCK7oBRPiHSeyWz2u1lTmI/0vr T8B8CwAyON+Fw19Vk5RYS8Cy3WB3HNSzzemRzEk//WgSPjpf9Tb6FJfUmtXhEFcuaNv2 m4Wgy/3AufwAU7BEnvS1uZW7CTSwFkX5Ua6lzgZT13wi69Pc2tS2+CTxr4i7bPgPWc5c RT4g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=bfu2Utb9Kdf9HxrsIAATSKs9gSPH24onh7l/QRcuFu0=; b=ZkFxypzffX2z5VOKAlKfUB5lKU3z7xTvaExP87XsGpQpYPJ9E7ucPH9y5ZF5DwSibK EDakEnBTAGnKcnNTgDARtqf4qaMiAUCXxfMnhaK+kY6GdZC0dMrMeKIn5I86eJ7vSlDJ nG1Cmf6xbnFq/6jZ/XrTQDHXejUxxJHMrfhSlYIBi/esVbTLudzjzGuEFDTJ5AylrHct 3KMnfZdsBS74WcFWKFEsL5UqnwtXHdkq4Iw/1bNH0ityFxXBn3lTeeKnd3LTr6WT5jEZ i0H0w1ikMXfLctnKLuuEz95TaHdt8DbIWhdX4HvKe5Rl8VIUh4tkCmm9YT+zOkOpCK8Y d2sg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tJSkDYafHd0NKXEcBS7YGzQdQzQxQ17RkiOh9VWTajHrTF/3EtFAOKTm3+cP5OWcwDL
X-Received: by 10.98.103.7 with SMTP id b7mr5782363pfc.19.1465497587167; Thu, 09 Jun 2016 11:39:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2620:101:80fc:224:2c56:4df9:4f07:7d77? ([2620:101:80fc:224:2c56:4df9:4f07:7d77]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id et3sm11648849pad.48.2016.06.09.11.39.45 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 09 Jun 2016 11:39:46 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Kit Cambridge <kcambridge@mozilla.com>
In-Reply-To: <BN3PR03MB240396B9F24E762D04E61CEB835D0@BN3PR03MB2403.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 11:40:17 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <C0BA4CA4-A170-4BB0-8088-8FFCBFE08ED6@mozilla.com>
References: <CALt3x6=_yc9TegOut_g+6W5fvhP7sfW+_gwRZnEVFA5PNgER6Q@mail.gmail.com> <6af49c2baf1b4e4f884b812d573b947e@Antiope.crf.canon.fr> <CABkgnnWebfxnPOLMXK+n+2G=c8DOG4Eb4AWMsWXJmmdnE4pUwg@mail.gmail.com> <989D9268-BE9A-47F7-9181-C0F323D1DA1F@mozilla.com> <CAP8-Fq=ccph+RcKH9byKD6f-05zHYkUvMVG=OR=4=rq06dc7DA@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnUYH7b1N-QKs5JVuYpZGBhrQqt9cQ+Vt7LeHuLY_+LR9w@mail.gmail.com> <CAP8-Fq=adQhi3ik27CNee8Q8bZWD5vkX2cJUqOehzHaSb_+kAg@mail.gmail.com> <BN3PR03MB240396B9F24E762D04E61CEB835D0@BN3PR03MB2403.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
To: Brian Raymor <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/webpush/u5eEp_sT4xeaiqJ6d90ZO3hLeyU>
Cc: Costin Manolache <costin@gmail.com>, RUELLAN Herve <Herve.Ruellan@crf.canon.fr>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, "webpush@ietf.org" <webpush@ietf.org>, Peter Beverloo <beverloo@google.com>
Subject: Re: [Webpush] Non-blocking comments on -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: Thu, 09 Jun 2016 18:39:51 -0000

Following up: I think keeping the 4k minimum makes sense. It really depends on the service that’s proxying the message…or the characteristics of the receiving device, as Costin points out.

The push server can chunk the message before proxying, per Martin’s suggestion. It could also refuse to deliver the message with another 400-class status code, instead of a 413.

On Jun 7, 2016, at 4:17 PM, Brian Raymor <Brian.Raymor@microsoft.com> wrote:

> If there are no further comments or proposals, I will close https://github.com/webpush-wg/webpush-protocol/issues/109
>  
> Thanks,
> …Brian

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email