Re: [aerogear-dev] Web Push protocol WGLC

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&gt; > 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 > _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev