Hi, we noticed some strange behavior when sending notifications to all variants of an app: - we have 3 ios devices - 7 android devices - when sending a notification to all variants, 4 devices are notified

This applies to the REST interface too. When sending messages to only one variant, the number of recipients is correct for both the web and the rest interface. It would be nice to get some hint what could be wrong... Regards Mischa _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

Matthias Wessendorf wrote > On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Neumann, Mischa (init) < > Mischa.Neumann@ >> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> we noticed some strange behavior when sending notifications to all >> variants of an app: >> - we have 3 ios devices >> - 7 android devices >> - when sending a notification to all variants, 4 devices are notified >> > > instead of 10 - that's wrong :) > > Can you share the CURL for the rest call? no curl, but the payload (REST) is something like {"message":{"alert":"unit-test alert message","badge":-1,"priority":"NORMAL","windows":{"type":null,"duration":null,"badge":null,"tileType":null,"toastType":null,"images":[],"textFields":[],"page":null},"apns":{"content-available":false},"user-data":{"warningId":12}},"criteria":{"categories":["unit-test"]},"config":{"ttl":-1}} and from the WEB interface { "alert": "an alle ohne kategorie", "priority": "normal", "criteria": { "categories": null, "variants": null, "alias": null, "deviceType": null }, "config": { "ttl": -1 } } Mischa -- View this message in context: http://aerogear-dev.1069024.n5.nabble.com/aerogear-dev-broken-push-notifi... Sent from the aerogear-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

Matthias Wessendorf wrote > when you say 4 devices - out of 10 are receiving notifications: > are that all 3 ios devices, and just one Android device? > > what version of the Android SDK are you using ? yes, you are right, now: - we have 26 android and 5 ios devices, all registered to the category "PRODUCTS" - {"message":{"alert":"unit-test alert message","badge":-1,"priority":"NORMAL","windows":{"type":null,"duration":null,"badge":null,"tileType":null,"toastType":null,"images":[],"textFields":[],"page":null},"apns":{"content-available":false},"user-data":{"warningId":12}},"criteria":{"categories":["PRODUCTS"]},"config":{"ttl":-1}} is delivered to 6 devices (5 ios and 1 android) the devices are not registering themselves at the UPS but the backend server does this as a delegate. sample from unit test: >> "Authorization: Basic ZjJl..." >> "{"alias":"42","categories":["FOOD","PRODUCTS"],"deviceToken":"aaaaaaaa >> aaaaaaaa aaaaaaaa aaaaaaaa aaaaaaaa aaaaaaaa aaaaaaaa 302087"}" << "{"id":"6b186514-f0d7-461a-b996-b6efee732a04","enabled":true,"deviceToken":"aaaaaaaa aaaaaaaa aaaaaaaa aaaaaaaa aaaaaaaa aaaaaaaa aaaaaaaa 302087","deviceType":null,"operatingSystem":null,"osVersion":null,"alias":"42","categories":[{"name":"PRODUCTS"},{"name":"FOOD"}],"platform":null}[\r][\n]" --> works like a charm Mischa -- View this message in context: http://aerogear-dev.1069024.n5.nabble.com/aerogear-dev-broken-push-notifi... Sent from the aerogear-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <javascript:;> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

Matthias Wessendorf wrote > Ah, I think the delegate is the issue; because it lacks the FCM topic code > from Android SDK we had no problems with aerogear-unifiedpush-server-1.2.0-alpha.1 and not when naming the variants with

aerogear-unifiedpush-server-1.1.3.Final

but I would give it a try: how would a correct json request look like? couldn't find something matching at https://aerogear.org/docs/specs/aerogear-unifiedpush-rest-1.0.x/registry/... Mischa -- View this message in context: http://aerogear-dev.1069024.n5.nabble.com/aerogear-dev-broken-push-notifi... Sent from the aerogear-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

Matthias Wessendorf wrote > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 10:42 AM, mischa &lt; > mischa.neumann@ > &gt; wrote: > >> Matthias Wessendorf wrote >> > Ah, I think the delegate is the issue; because it lacks the FCM topic >> code >> > from Android SDK >> >> we had no problems with aerogear-unifiedpush-server-1.2.0-alpha.1 >> and not when naming the variants with >> > > 1.1.2 and 1.2.0-alpha.1 is not containing FCM > > >> aerogear-unifiedpush-server-1.1.3.Final >> > > but FCM is included in 1.1.3 and master (1.2.0-alpha.2-SNAPSHOT) > > > FCM registration is done here: > https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-android-push/blob/master/aerogear-an... > > But... I wonder... if we can, or should, do something about that on the > srver side... hrm... I see: ... Sent push notification to GCM topic: &#x2F;topics&#x2F;PRODUCTS ... and as no client didn't register with the help of aerogear-android-push for this topic at Firebase, it wouldn't get any notifications. then the frontend message "X receivers" is misleadingly as one receiver is a FCM topic channel :-)

and it's not clear, why the UPS is behaving differently when the android variant is directly targeted in the push request.

Mischa -- View this message in context: http://aerogear-dev.1069024.n5.nabble.com/aerogear-dev-broken-push-notifi... Sent from the aerogear-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 10:42 AM, mischa &lt;

mischa.neumann@

&gt; wrote: But... I wonder... if we can, or should, do something about that on the srver side... hrm...

we worked around this by explicitely filtering for all known variants when sending a push message through the REST interface... -- View this message in context: http://aerogear-dev.1069024.n5.nabble.com/aerogear-dev-broken-push-notifi... Sent from the aerogear-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

Matthias Wessendorf wrote > Not sure I follow here > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 9:00 AM, mischa &lt; > mischa.neumann@ > &gt; wrote: > >> we worked around this by explicitely filtering for all known variants >> when >> sending a push message through the REST interface... when sending {"message":{"alert":"unit-test alert message","badge":-1,"priority":"NORMAL","windows":{"type":null,"duration":null,"badge":null,"tileType":null,"toastType":null,"images":[],"textFields":[],"page":null},"apns":{"content-available":false},"user-data":{"warningId":12}},"criteria":{"categories":["unit-test"],"variants":["65bac606-5b73-42d8-9641-d70948c9717e","f2eed0fb-6e9a-42c6-8759-457e2241daae"]},"config":{"ttl":-1}} all devices are notified, with {"message":{"alert":"unit-test alert message","badge":-1,"priority":"NORMAL","windows":{"type":null,"duration":null,"badge":null,"tileType":null,"toastType":null,"images":[],"textFields":[],"page":null},"apns":{"content-available":false},"user-data":{"warningId":12}},"criteria":{"categories":["unit-test"]},"config":{"ttl":-1}} not Mischa -- View this message in context: http://aerogear-dev.1069024.n5.nabble.com/aerogear-dev-broken-push-notifi... Sent from the aerogear-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev