Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 22:07:50 -0800
From: Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts
 <reply+AFTOJK3WLYIP34QI4XQQ4XV4KINDNEVBNHHCDBMSUQ@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3446/585567516@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3446@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3446@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Allow application CONNECTION_CLOSE
 everywhere (#3446)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="--==_mimepart_5e44e7b6c815b_46383fd70e8cd96095747";
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/7JS2TfIlRZwuXbDSQd7VkWmGfOc>


----==_mimepart_5e44e7b6c815b_46383fd70e8cd96095747
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> I suspect that the right answer is to switch to a transport-level CONNECTION_CLOSE with a different error code in that case.

Agreed. FWIW, we state the following, which I think is the right advice.
_When an application wishes to abandon a connection during the handshake, an endpoint can send a CONNECTION_CLOSE frame (type 0x1c) with an error code of 0x15a ("user_canceled" alert; see [TLS13]) in an Initial or a Handshake packet. ([section 19.19](https://quicwg.org/base-drafts/draft-ietf-quic-transport.html#section-19.19-7))_

> Allowing application CONNECTION_CLOSE in 0-RTT would still make sense then, if only to keep the API surface consistent.

No objection from me.

-- 
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/3446#issuecomment-585567516
----==_mimepart_5e44e7b6c815b_46383fd70e8cd96095747
Content-Type: text/html;
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<blockquote>
<p>I suspect that the right answer is to switch to a transport-level CONNECTION_CLOSE with a different error code in that case.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Agreed. FWIW, we state the following, which I think is the right advice.<br>
<em>When an application wishes to abandon a connection during the handshake, an endpoint can send a CONNECTION_CLOSE frame (type 0x1c) with an error code of 0x15a ("user_canceled" alert; see [TLS13]) in an Initial or a Handshake packet. (<a href="https://quicwg.org/base-drafts/draft-ietf-quic-transport.html#section-19.19-7" rel="nofollow">section 19.19</a>)</em></p>
<blockquote>
<p>Allowing application CONNECTION_CLOSE in 0-RTT would still make sense then, if only to keep the API surface consistent.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>No objection from me.</p>

<p style="font-size:small;-webkit-text-size-adjust:none;color:#666;">&mdash;<br />You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.<br />Reply to this email directly, <a href="https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3446?email_source=notifications&amp;email_token=AFTOJKYWQCKQYNQ7BRQF7RTRCTPTNA5CNFSM4KSJWE5KYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOELTQ2HA#issuecomment-585567516">view it on GitHub</a>, or <a href="https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFTOJK45ZB7UZP77PETSRSTRCTPTNANCNFSM4KSJWE5A">unsubscribe</a>.<img src="https://github.com/notifications/beacon/AFTOJK5CHC5YLA73RRLZ7ULRCTPTNA5CNFSM4KSJWE5KYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOELTQ2HA.gif" height="1" width="1" alt="" /></p>
<script type="application/ld+json">[
{
"@context": "http://schema.org",
"@type": "EmailMessage",
"potentialAction": {
"@type": "ViewAction",
"target": "https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3446?email_source=notifications\u0026email_token=AFTOJKYWQCKQYNQ7BRQF7RTRCTPTNA5CNFSM4KSJWE5KYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOELTQ2HA#issuecomment-585567516",
"url": "https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3446?email_source=notifications\u0026email_token=AFTOJKYWQCKQYNQ7BRQF7RTRCTPTNA5CNFSM4KSJWE5KYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOELTQ2HA#issuecomment-585567516",
"name": "View Issue"
},
"description": "View this Issue on GitHub",
"publisher": {
"@type": "Organization",
"name": "GitHub",
"url": "https://github.com"
}
}
]</script>
----==_mimepart_5e44e7b6c815b_46383fd70e8cd96095747--