Subject: [Webpush] Webpush at IETF92?

From: Shida Schubert <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 19:46:11 -0800

All;

I have tentatively booked 1.5 hour in Dallas to meet and discuss face to face but seeing that there has been little to no traffic since the last IETF, despite number of hands indicating that they will contribute, I am doubting the need to hold the meeting. 

Actually the only email that was sent out to the list was Martin informing the WG that he has submitted the updated version of the core draft addressing all the comments. 

Furthermore, with so little traffic we see on the list, should we consider closing the WG? 

I would like to hear from the WG whether the work indicated on the charter is worthwhile pursuing and if there are enough energy backing it. 

Many Thanks!

Shida as a co-chair

---

From: "Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 20:47:42 +0000

(co-chair hat on)

Seconding Shida here.  Nobody has responded yet.  Speak up if you care, 
please.

On 2/11/15, 8:46 PM, "Shida Schubert" <[email-masked]> wrote:

>
>All;
>
>I have tentatively booked 1.5 hour in Dallas to meet and discuss face to 
>face but seeing that there has been little to no traffic since the last 
>IETF, despite number of hands indicating that they will contribute, I am 
>doubting the need to hold the meeting. 
>
>Actually the only email that was sent out to the list was Martin 
>informing the WG that he has submitted the updated version of the core 
>draft addressing all the comments. 
>
>I would like to hear from the WG whether the work indicated on the 
>charter is worthwhile pursuing and if there are enough energy backing it. 
>
>Many Thanks!
>
>Shida as a co-chair
>_______________________________________________
>Webpush mailing list
>[email-masked]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webpush
>

-- 
Joe Hildebrand

---

From: Peter Beverloo <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 21:00:49 +0000

We (Google) are definitely interested in continuing with the working group.

Furthermore, we'll also attend the sessions at IETF 92. Thank you for
scheduling time.

I regret the low level of activity on the mailing lists, and agree that we
should at least start a series of discussions prior to the meeting in
Dallas.

The large open topic for us is encryption, and how this ties in to
one-to-many distribution of messages by the push service. Also related to
this is the subject of authentication, notably of the sender (application
server).

We're working on an early draft proposal, and I'm hopeful to have something
ready prior to IETF 92. At least we need to have the use cases and
associated constraints defined.

Thanks,
Peter

---

From: Eduardo Gueiros <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 07:59:50 -0700

I think there's definitely interest as demonstrated in IETF 91. If you know
someone who raised their hands and have not yet expressed themselves, try
to engage them. I know a few, and I myself I am guilty of not being more
active in this WG as originally committed. I think it's an important
subject matter that should not be easily dismissed.