[Technical Errata Reported] RFC7540 (6309)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Mon, 19 October 2020 02:08 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6EBB3A1218 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 19:08:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.748
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.748 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T4UsRlj4Gi6F for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 19:08:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lyra.w3.org (lyra.w3.org [128.30.52.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1652B3A1214 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 19:08:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by lyra.w3.org with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1kUKYc-0001af-6J for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 02:05:54 +0000
Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 02:05:54 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1kUKYc-0001af-6J@lyra.w3.org>
Received: from mimas.w3.org ([128.30.52.79]) by lyra.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>) id 1kUKYZ-0001Zw-L1 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 02:05:51 +0000
Received: from rfc-editor.org ([4.31.198.49]) by mimas.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>) id 1kUKYW-0005On-TG for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 02:05:51 +0000
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 50446F406F4; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 19:05:34 -0700 (PDT)
To: mike@belshe.com, fenix@google.com, martin.thomson@gmail.com, superuser@gmail.com, barryleiba@computer.org, mnot@mnot.net, tpauly@apple.com
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: mbishop@evequefou.be, ietf-http-wg@w3.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20201019020534.50446F406F4@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 19:05:34 -0700
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=4.31.198.49; envelope-from=wwwrun@rfc-editor.org; helo=rfc-editor.org
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.2
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1kUKYW-0005On-TG 4dc5e2e68547e35fbda7d8ee69f42235
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7540 (6309)
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/20201019020534.50446F406F4@rfc-editor.org>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/38102
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <https://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7540,
"Hypertext Transfer Protocol Version 2 (HTTP/2)".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6309

--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: Mike Bishop <mbishop@evequefou.be>

Section: 5.1

Original Text
-------------
      Receiving any frame other than HEADERS or PRIORITY on a stream in
      this state MUST be treated as a connection error (Section 5.4.1)
      of type PROTOCOL_ERROR.

...and similar throughout the section

Corrected Text
--------------
      Receiving any frame defined in this document other than HEADERS
      or PRIORITY on a stream in
      this state MUST be treated as a connection error (Section 5.4.1)
      of type PROTOCOL_ERROR.  Frames of unknown types are ignored.

Notes
-----
Discovered via Chrome's GREASE experiment and discussed on-list, but never filed that I can find.  The HTTP/2 RFC mandates tolerance of any unknown frame type, but also mandates rejection of frames which are not the few listed.  The conservative solution in current deployments is, of course, to restrict sending extension frame types to open (and half-closed (remote)) streams.  The text which should have been in the document to begin with, however, is that only frame types defined in the HTTP/2 specification were to be impacted by that restriction.

This is already stated in section 5.1:

   In the absence of more specific guidance elsewhere in this document,
   implementations SHOULD treat the receipt of a frame that is not
   expressly permitted in the description of a state as a connection
   error (Section 5.4.1) of type PROTOCOL_ERROR.  Note that PRIORITY can
   be sent and received in any stream state.  Frames of unknown types
   are ignored.

However, it's unclear whether the "any frame other than" language is to be construed as "more specific guidance."

Instructions:
-------------
This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party  
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 

--------------------------------------
RFC7540 (draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-17)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Hypertext Transfer Protocol Version 2 (HTTP/2)
Publication Date    : May 2015
Author(s)           : M. Belshe, R. Peon, M. Thomson, Ed.
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Hypertext Transfer Protocol Bis APP
Area                : Applications
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG