Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Allow the Transport to Stop/Reset a Stream? (#3291)

Lucas Pardue <> Thu, 12 December 2019 21:37 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C824E120024 for <>; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 13:37:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.382
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.382 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.618, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rYD4PsqFtATs for <>; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 13:37:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30859120142 for <>; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 13:37:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78C3E6A1111 for <>; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 13:37:46 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1576186666; bh=gp+jrUtsTwjAX3kQz9gX34QBvTITuXfVlwaz0QMoBJ4=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=e83pnJD0NVmW7js31cKsCLVLzoGkrwTxG/NAV8+IqwMWBOsNCn1qtBKvlSod1zpZB 9J54SJ6mn37Yay/4hvqhZL17TFmGyAEFvxTFae96nCfjj3gayuPBrt3hfW0Txh8TTc QzSdGblEkjaqMKe4ZZutrkZTd8zCcHAaGNV10hdw=
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 13:37:46 -0800
From: Lucas Pardue <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3291/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Allow the Transport to Stop/Reset a Stream? (#3291)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5df2b32a69956_20d3ff82dccd96c114590"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: LPardue
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 21:37:50 -0000

The suggestion runs the wrong way against the protocol design. There is no universal application error code space, each application mapping defines their own. So either you send a CONNECTION_CLOSE with transport error code 0x1 or you have to send an application specific-error code in CONNECTION_CLOSE, STOP_SENDING or RESET_STREAM. One might want to recommend or mandate that each application error space has an INTERNAL error but that seems overly prescriptive to be in the core transport doc

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: