Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Rationalise Server-Push-specific rejection error codes (#2812)

Lucas Pardue <> Wed, 19 June 2019 13:07 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FCA1120483 for <>; Wed, 19 Jun 2019 06:07:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.391
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.391 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] 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 9QwHT1wAeufR for <>; Wed, 19 Jun 2019 06:07:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7FE7512047F for <>; Wed, 19 Jun 2019 06:07:09 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 06:07:08 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1560949628; bh=4Td06Z6uvjC8sb+jWcXfDrlX2go+pFT3HNC3Fj0mkvQ=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=aIqS5QS1SJb/NqMRz6MQcfaP05WgLsfLMOapNFDbCtYlzjg5UnoHDg2VO1YCgtg9X IRhupUq7/cNzcNiKtqCsdTFxuwhYgZA1mrHI8RSzi3j8RRSNTnvmLBknHg6OyE8uNH toD7snf1LxjL68vW+1egLwtjhqwmx9eQg0GGsqFM=
From: Lucas Pardue <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2812/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Rationalise Server-Push-specific rejection error codes (#2812)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5d0a337c4f189_79813fbcd58cd968178887"; 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: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 13:07:11 -0000

> In addition, I think we might also want to remove CANCEL_PUSH in favor of using REQUEST_CANCELLED. IIUC, the semantics of CANCEL_PUSH can be (or can be) exactly the same as REQUEST_CANCELLED after the client has sent the entire request.

Clarification, do you mean:

1. replace the HTTP_PUSH_REFUSED error with HTTP_REQUEST_CANCELLED error?
2. remove CANCEL_PUSH frame altogether and replace the function by sending a STOP_SENDING with HTTP_REQUEST_CANCELLED error?

I don't think option 2 is possible, the purpose of CANCEL_PUSH frame is to stop pushes before any stream is created - at that point there is no stream ID to reference.

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