Maybe... It's certainly worth considering. I'm having a brief argument with myself about any possible security/ cost problems with having the UAIDs be poll-able like that. I think the security thing is probably not much of a problem since it doesn't really leak any info and anyone polling that data would stand out like a sore thumb. The cost shouldn't be much of a problem either, particularly if we add in some rules about polling per second. I'll write up [a separate ticket](https://mozilla-hub.atlassian.net/browse/PUSH-553) for this. (for folk without jira access, the summary of that ticket is: > Per discussion in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1486010#c11 , > > It would be useful if there was an Autoendpoint URL that allowed for external UAs to poll and see if a given UAID is viable or not. > > e.g. `HEAD /v1/check/{uaid}` which would return a JSON formatted response containing `{"status":status_value}` where status_value is 200 or either 404 or 410 depending on the stored UAID status. An error would be returned as a JSON formatted response containing `{"error": error_code, "errno": error_number, "message": descriptive_text}`, with updates to the Autopush documentation to describe these errors and resolutions. > > This endpoint would need to be coordinated with the UA client team. Let me know if that sounds good or if you need any changes.
Bug 1486010 Comment 17 Edit History
Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.
Maybe... It's certainly worth considering. I'm having a brief argument with myself about any possible security/ cost problems with having the UAIDs be poll-able like that. I think the security thing is probably not much of a problem since it doesn't really leak any info and anyone polling that data would stand out like a sore thumb. The cost shouldn't be much of a problem either, particularly if we add in some rules about polling per second. I'll write up [a separate ticket](https://mozilla-hub.atlassian.net/browse/PUSH-553) for this. (for folk without jira access, the summary of that ticket is: > Per discussion in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1486010#c11 , > > It would be useful if there was an Autoendpoint URL that allowed for external UAs to poll and see if a given UAID is viable or not. > > e.g. `HEAD /v1/check/{uaid}` which would return a JSON formatted response containing `{"status":status_value}` where status_value is 200 or either 404 or 410 depending on the stored UAID status. An error would be returned as a JSON formatted response containing `{"error": error_code, "message": descriptive_text}`, with updates to the Autopush documentation to describe these errors and resolutions. > > This endpoint would need to be coordinated with the UA client team. Let me know if that sounds good or if you need any changes.
Maybe... It's certainly worth considering. I'm having a brief argument with myself about any possible security/ cost problems with having the UAIDs be poll-able like that. I think the security thing is probably not much of a problem since it doesn't really leak any info and anyone polling that data would stand out like a sore thumb. The cost shouldn't be much of a problem either, particularly if we add in some rules about polling per second. I'll write up [a separate ticket](https://mozilla-hub.atlassian.net/browse/PUSH-553) for this. (for folk without jira access, the summary of that ticket is: > Per discussion in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1486010#c11 , > > It would be useful if there was an Autoendpoint URL that allowed for external UAs to poll and see if a given UAID is viable or not. > > e.g. `HEAD /v1/check/{uaid}` which would return a JSON formatted response containing `{"status":status_value}` where status_value is 200 or either 404 or 410 depending on the stored UAID status. An error would be returned as a JSON formatted response containing `{"error": error_code, "errno": error_number, "message": descriptive_text}`, with updates to the Autopush documentation to describe these errors and resolutions. > > This endpoint would need to be coordinated with the UA client team. Let me know if that sounds good or if you need any changes.
Maybe... It's certainly worth considering. I'm having a brief argument with myself about any possible security/ cost problems with having the UAIDs be poll-able like that. I think the security thing is probably not much of a problem since it doesn't really leak any info and anyone polling that data would stand out like a sore thumb. The cost shouldn't be much of a problem either, particularly if we add in some rules about polling per second. I'll write up [a separate ticket](https://mozilla-hub.atlassian.net/browse/PUSH-553) for this. (for folk without jira access, the summary of that ticket is: > Per discussion in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1486010#c11 , > > It would be useful if there was an Autoendpoint URL that allowed for external UAs to poll and see if a given UAID is viable or not. > > e.g. `HEAD /v1/check/{uaid}` which would return a JSON formatted response containing `{"status":status_value}` where status_value is 200 or either 404 or 410 depending on the stored UAID status. An error would be returned as a JSON formatted response containing `{"status": 500, "error": error_code, "errno": error_number, "message": descriptive_text}`, with updates to the Autopush documentation to describe these errors and resolutions. > > This endpoint would need to be coordinated with the UA client team. Let me know if that sounds good or if you need any changes.