Return-Path: X-Original-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67A2512082E for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 08:01:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.999 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_32=0.001, 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: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=github.com 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 H2236epGTP59 for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 08:01:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from out-19.smtp.github.com (out-19.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.202]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1FEE12006F for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 08:01:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-lowworker-943b171.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-943b171.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.22.59]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1435B520354 for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 08:01:56 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1573574516; bh=XODb3kC5ONmQTYxDMPaVb5RKumCqIQ4ebYSKS6oMhl0=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=p4MFI8St9aF/A0GUrsA1R609y4dpppu/nx31JhKpU3dqEPak7Kg7JlVsO+zCnhNlg 9gTJUP6yCorpybxUsHBR3itR/oU/VcJqSuAVqZ4Twy1o2NjBshg05sI14Mc1s4e/c0 btf66fFukcTFk6LIE1thwsxPYXDkQR4wXsYFDXk8= Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 08:01:56 -0800 From: Lucas Pardue Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts To: quicwg/base-drafts Cc: Subscribed Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clearer text for application errors (#3226) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5dcad7745d76_20433f7ece8cd96c8835c"; 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 X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org Archived-At: X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org 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: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 16:01:59 -0000 ----==_mimepart_5dcad7745d76_20433f7ece8cd96c8835c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit LPardue commented on this pull request. > cause a stream to be terminated. A local instance of the application protocol uses a direct API call and a remote instance uses the STOP_SENDING frame, which triggers an automatic RESET_STREAM. -Resetting a stream without knowledge of the application protocol could cause the -protocol to enter an unrecoverable state. Application protocols might require -certain streams to be reliably delivered in order to guarantee consistent state -between endpoints. Application protocols SHOULD define rules for handling -streams that are prematurely cancelled by either endpoint. +Resetting a stream without the involvement of the application protocol could +cause the application protocol to enter an unrecoverable state. Application +protocols might require certain streams to be reliably delivered in order to to split hairs what does "might require certain streams to be reliably delivered" really mean here? Streams produce reliable byte streams. Is the intent more to say something like "applications expect streams to run to completion" and that premature exit causes that assumption to break? -- 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/pull/3226#pullrequestreview-315647334 ----==_mimepart_5dcad7745d76_20433f7ece8cd96c8835c Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

@LPardue commented on this pull request.

In draft-ietf-quic-transport.md:

>  cause a stream to be terminated.  A local instance of the application protocol
 uses a direct API call and a remote instance uses the STOP_SENDING frame, which
 triggers an automatic RESET_STREAM.
 
-Resetting a stream without knowledge of the application protocol could cause the
-protocol to enter an unrecoverable state.  Application protocols might require
-certain streams to be reliably delivered in order to guarantee consistent state
-between endpoints.  Application protocols SHOULD define rules for handling
-streams that are prematurely cancelled by either endpoint.
+Resetting a stream without the involvement of the application protocol could
+cause the application protocol to enter an unrecoverable state.  Application
+protocols might require certain streams to be reliably delivered in order to

to split hairs what does "might require certain streams to be reliably delivered" really mean here? Streams produce reliable byte streams. Is the intent more to say something like "applications expect streams to run to completion" and that premature exit causes that assumption to break?

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

----==_mimepart_5dcad7745d76_20433f7ece8cd96c8835c--