Re: [Wish] Use entity-tags for solving out of order PATCH requests

[Lorenzo Miniero <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, 2 Mar 2022 17:58:11 +0100
Sergio Garcia Murillo <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I have prepared a PR for the draft to address the issue of how to
> protect WHIP against out of order PATCH requests based on the
> entity-tags as discussed at the latest IETF meeting.
> 
> You can find the changes here:
> 
> https://github.com/wish-wg/webrtc-http-ingest-protocol/pull/24/files?short_path=6ca9ae6#diff-6ca9ae63875a605dbaf6d8e45c08b5945951d62135ae0661065b7fe9ebb04d84
> 
> Please, provide any feedback in the github PR so we can merge it and
> prepare a new draft before the next meeting.
> 
> I had reviewed my notes and minutes from the last meeting and I think
> there are no other pending topics as there was some pushback for
> the proposed changes, so I will just leave the draft without changes
> on those areas.
> 
> Anything else that I am missing?
> 
> Best regards
> Sergio


Hi Sergio,

I think the changes look fine, I just have a couple of comments:

	* What error should be returned in case a PATCH to trigger an
	  ICE restart does NOT contain the "*" If-Match value? The
	  draft says it's a MUST, but doesn't elaborate on the
	  consequences if that doesn't happen. Intuitively a 412 could
	  be returned as well, but the PATCH for ICE restart could
	  actually contains the last valid ETag, and so in that case a
	  412 sounds "wrong".

	* It's also not clear to me if ETags apply to other requests
	  addressed to a WHIP resource. Thinking of the DELETE to tear
	  down the PeerConnection, for instance, would that need the
	  right ETag to be provided as well? Or would ETags be limited
	  exclusively to PATCH? If so, it might be better to clarify it
	  in the doc to limit the scope.

Thanks,
Lorenzo

-- 
I'm getting older but, unlike whisky, I'm not getting any better
https://twitter.com/elminiero