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

Igor Lubashev <> Mon, 09 December 2019 04:07 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 355AF1200CC for <>; Sun, 8 Dec 2019 20:07:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.596
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.596 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_28=1.404, 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 g7YpHVgpEzMq for <>; Sun, 8 Dec 2019 20:07:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B88FD12004A for <>; Sun, 8 Dec 2019 20:07:45 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2019 20:07:45 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1575864465; bh=ACF0+WrNXaOCIwae5tp424G7gbupG3fiPmzFkxP00HQ=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=KTq76QZXGvvLzGwXsXJ27P2q3SAzeCPDmCq2PbYzw85qy3jcRsfrWs3xYeQ39Z0oH 7OpsLnHxRLuwCQ2VL1dURIKiacdJPySNWyuehtY/VzfxnmIQkl4wLgM/s3wYVCL5ZF MNdOc1j2lwqj4yif4iYvUnrBGeGbsC/6KMn1gvzo=
From: Igor Lubashev <>
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_5dedc89114e35_42f43fd2466cd95c470333"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: igorlord
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, 09 Dec 2019 04:07:47 -0000

The problem at hand is the transport layer unable to fulfill transport layer responsibilities (in this case, it is managing a stream properly).  The most coherent response seems to be giving up on the connection via transport's version of CONNECTION_CLOSE (frame=0x1c), assuming that the transport layer is still able to generate at least this.  I think this is what @kazuho is proposing.

I see @nibanks proposing a more nuanced response of just giving up on a specific stream, assuming this is what it would take the transport layer to "recover".  It seems like a more complicated choice, because now every application would need to be ready for the transport to give up on any stream at any time -- something that many applications may find very hard to recover from.

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