Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Allow the Transport to Stop/Reset a Stream? (#3291)

Lucas Pardue <> Mon, 16 December 2019 22:26 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70FBF120949 for <>; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 14:26:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.454
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.454 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_20=1.546, 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: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PJVzyX8rIm5G for <>; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 14:26:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A6B7120947 for <>; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 14:26:47 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 14:26:46 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1576535206; bh=iZCgZYX/vh7TzjfIFG/vi2G0sYWW5YnAXsE2VRcR1WY=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=JVZiq9cbM4aRWc92/KfZj1JSJbQe+WwraAoKT1jpRCEhjhfZt3Uxu1487F1izxED6 7+2mXnGf48hYujGPuylM+AJEuix+2e6ZQ0/A39BzaJHSGFfOq7UoXUpZwulS75vinb xqbXyfBR8TvU+6QRJeUZ5kSQTumRwDC8JyawtZ9U=
From: Lucas Pardue <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3291/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Allow the Transport to Stop/Reset a Stream? (#3291)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5df804a67a8ac_d8d3fe2de0cd9641674d"; 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: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 22:26:49 -0000

I was attempting to say that because QUIC provides no hand holding when it comes to streams, then using streams for an application without defining any application-level mapping (especially around the handling of errors) seems like an odd design choice. Especially given that you have to negotiate _some application_ when completing a handshake.  

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