6:21 p.m.
Community provides a good feedback and a lot of changes were merged. WG
decided to postpone WGLC for a 2 weeks to resolve all issues.
New discussion threads were initiated by me:
1. Define a list of headers, which must be transmitted to the UA:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/webpush/current/threads.html#00578
2. Different status codes for negative Push Message Receipts:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/webpush/current/threads.html#00579
3. When UA should send an acknowledgement?
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/webpush/current/threads.html#00580
4. 414 Request-URL Too Long:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/webpush/current/threads.html#00581
5. Try to deliver receipt at least once, even if TTL expired:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/webpush/current/threads.html#00582
6. Delivery receipt may be sent before AS request delivery:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/webpush/current/threads.html#00597
For some of them new GitHub issues was created. Also here is one issue
without sending messages to the Web Push mailing list:
Prefer: wait=0 for Receiving Push Message Receipts:
https://github.com/webpush-wg/webpush-protocol/issues/113
Best regards,
Idel Pivnitskiy
--
Twitter: @idelpivnitskiy <https://twitter.com/idelpivnitskiy>
GitHub: @idelpivnitskiy <https://github.com/idelpivnitskiy>
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 7:03 AM, Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> Daniel, could you review the current draft too, please? My
suggestion
will be to read editor's copy [2], instead of IETF page [3], because they
merged a few changes this week [4].
I'll try to catch up on the spec this week (hard to find the spare time to
do this at the moment).
On 3 June 2016 at 12:51, Idel Pivnitskiy <idel.pivnitskiy(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Looks like Web Push WG ready for the WGLC [1]. They gathers feedback as
> soon as possible.
>
> I've initiated a few thread:
>
> 1.
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/webpush/current/threads.html#00549
> 2.
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/webpush/current/threads.html#00559
>
> Also I want to ask them some questions about not clear parts of the draft
> for me.
>
> Daniel, could you review the current draft too, please? My suggestion
> will be to read editor's copy [2], instead of IETF page [3], because they
> merged a few changes this week [4].
>
> [1]
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/webpush/current/threads.html#00524
> [2] https://webpush-wg.github.io/webpush-protocol/
> [3] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-webpush-protocol-05
> [4] https://github.com/webpush-wg/webpush-protocol/commits/master
>
> Best regards,
> Idel Pivnitskiy
> --
> Twitter: @idelpivnitskiy <https://twitter.com/idelpivnitskiy>
> GitHub: @idelpivnitskiy <https://github.com/idelpivnitskiy>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>
_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev