Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Remap STOPPING to something other than zero (#1804)

[Mike Bishop <[e-mail]>]

The value in having a STOPPING error code is understanding the source.  Because this is a transport feature, STOPPING permits the recipient to understand that the stream is being aborted because it sent a STOP_SENDING (i.e. its own action), not because the peer encountered a fatal error during the intervening RTT.  From another viewpoint, the "source" of the RST is the remote transport, not the remote application.

(I would envision STOP_SENDING surfacing to the remote API as a failure to write because the RST_STREAM has already been sent, not as a signal to which the application responds by triggering a RST_STREAM.)

I don't feel strongly opposed to having, say, a STOP_COMPLETE frame, but it would have identical practical effect to RST_STREAM.  That feels like a cosmetic change, and I'm not sure the difference is critical.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1804#issuecomment-425186886