[aerogear-dev] Web Push protocol WGLC

[Idel Pivnitskiy]

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 at 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 at 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 at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20160609/e15f4d32/attachment-0001.html