Re: Design Issue: HEADERS+PRIORITY "MUST be used" for each stream that is created??

[Martin Thomson <[e-mail]>]

The requirement for HEADERS+PRIORITY should only apply to the HTTP
request/response exchange, not everything.  Tier 3 and all that.

On 26 April 2013 11:47, James M Snell <[e-mail]> wrote:
> In the current draft (-02), under the definition of HEADERS+PRIORITY,
> we say that the frame "MUST be used for each stream that is created"..
>
> Is this really true? This is inconsistent with other parts of the spec...
>
> Elsewhere we say that streams are created by sending any frame that
> references an unused stream ID.
>
> We also say that PUSH_PROMISE frames are followed up by a HEADERS
> frame (not HEADERS+PRIORITY).
>
> I believe the intent here is that streams ought only to be created
> when sending a HEADERS, HEADERS+PRIORITY or PUSH_PROMISE frame that
> references an unused stream ID.
>
> A DATA frame that references a previously unused Stream ID ought to
> result in a PROTOCOL_ERROR.
>
> (which brings up an interesting question: what happens if I receive an
> RST_STREAM that references a previously unused stream id? Based on the
> rules so far, that would mean the stream ID would be closed before
> there is ever a chance to use it... possible DOS vector?)
>