Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2019 14:53:39 -0800
From: Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts
 <reply+0166e4ab96656a1a9990b7c6ef3bdd83c1e9cb6cb7fbe96292cf000000011870847392a169ce183b427c@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2412/460445798@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2412@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2412@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] MAX_PUSH_ID: lower-than-previous value conn
 error seems too severe (#2412)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="--==_mimepart_5c58c27392753_2e883fe9586d45bc1895e4";
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/XEuQBRRA-nQencbPHQpNYK3GjiQ>


----==_mimepart_5c58c27392753_2e883fe9586d45bc1895e4
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

A connection error is entirely appropriate.  The awkward compromise we have in the transport docs exists because there is at least a plausible argument in support of ignoring regressions in limits.  There, reordering and retransmission schemes might produce the situation (even if the latter might be somewhere between inadvisable and malicious).  Here, the frames appear on a strictly ordered stream with no chance that it is going to be missed.  I see no reason to treat this leniently.

The error code question I have no opinion on, other than to suggest the application of principles already articulated.

-- 
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/2412#issuecomment-460445798
----==_mimepart_5c58c27392753_2e883fe9586d45bc1895e4
Content-Type: text/html;
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p>A connection error is entirely appropriate.  The awkward compromise we=
 have in the transport docs exists because there is at least a plausible =
argument in support of ignoring regressions in limits.  There, reordering=
 and retransmission schemes might produce the situation (even if the latt=
er might be somewhere between inadvisable and malicious).  Here, the fram=
es appear on a strictly ordered stream with no chance that it is going to=
 be missed.  I see no reason to treat this leniently.</p>
<p>The error code question I have no opinion on, other than to suggest th=
e application of principles already articulated.</p>

<p style=3D"font-size:small;-webkit-text-size-adjust:none;color:#666;">&m=
dash;<br />You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thre=
ad.<br />Reply to this email directly, <a href=3D"https://github.com/quic=
wg/base-drafts/issues/2412#issuecomment-460445798">view it on GitHub</a>,=
 or <a href=3D"https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AWbkq9jk=
f6_-oOItNWZ6SPD160MlDcr1ks5vKLnzgaJpZM4aiHsa">mute the thread</a>.<img sr=
c=3D"https://github.com/notifications/beacon/AWbkqwIIFKowTJGzy2bC0KcXFeg1=
BBJcks5vKLnzgaJpZM4aiHsa.gif" height=3D"1" width=3D"1" alt=3D"" /></p>
<script type=3D"application/json" data-scope=3D"inboxmarkup">{"api_versio=
n":"1.0","publisher":{"api_key":"05dde50f1d1a384dd78767c55493e4bb","name"=
:"GitHub"},"entity":{"external_key":"github/quicwg/base-drafts","title":"=
quicwg/base-drafts","subtitle":"GitHub repository","main_image_url":"http=
s://github.githubassets.com/images/email/message_cards/header.png","avata=
r_image_url":"https://github.githubassets.com/images/email/message_cards/=
avatar.png","action":{"name":"Open in GitHub","url":"https://github.com/q=
uicwg/base-drafts"}},"updates":{"snippets":[{"icon":"PERSON","message":"@=
martinthomson in #2412: A connection error is entirely appropriate.  The =
awkward compromise we have in the transport docs exists because there is =
at least a plausible argument in support of ignoring regressions in limit=
s.  There, reordering and retransmission schemes might produce the situat=
ion (even if the latter might be somewhere between inadvisable and malici=
ous).  Here, the frames appear on a strictly ordered stream with no chanc=
e that it is going to be missed.  I see no reason to treat this leniently=
.\r\n\r\nThe error code question I have no opinion on, other than to sugg=
est the application of principles already articulated."}],"action":{"name=
":"View Issue","url":"https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2412#i=
ssuecomment-460445798"}}}</script>
<script type=3D"application/ld+json">[
{
"@context": "http://schema.org",
"@type": "EmailMessage",
"potentialAction": {
"@type": "ViewAction",
"target": "https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2412#issuecomment=
-460445798",
"url": "https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2412#issuecomment-46=
0445798",
"name": "View Issue"
},
"description": "View this Issue on GitHub",
"publisher": {
"@type": "Organization",
"name": "GitHub",
"url": "https://github.com"
}
}
]</script>=

----==_mimepart_5c58c27392753_2e883fe9586d45bc1895e4--