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

[Kazuho Oku <[e-mail]>]

>> I oppose to using 0xffxx, because the range is define as for private use in the transport error codes
> 
> Where is that indiciated. Is that HQ specific?

[Section 13.3](https://quicwg.org/base-drafts/draft-ietf-quic-transport.html#rfc.section.13.3): _"The “QUIC Transport Error Codes” registry governs a 16-bit space. This space is split into two spaces that are governed by different policies. Values with the first byte in the range 0x00 to 0xfe (in hexadecimal) are assigned via the Specification Required policy [RFC8126]. Values with the first byte 0xff are reserved for Private Use [RFC8126]."_

> IMO, reserving one value is the worst way to achieve this. Someone will always not be happy whatever value we chose, and the application layer will not understand why it can't use one value.

I agree that it is not a beautiful. But it is practical. It is beneficial to have an error code that covers all the three ways of closing responses, because that gives us a standard way of indicating how it was closed using just one number.

When tracking down an issue in the real world, it would often be the case that multiple HQ stacks are involved. It is highly preferable if we could just talk about the error codes rather than referring to the *frame type and error code* when trying to nail down issues.

-- 
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-424802605