Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] H3 GOAWAY should be symmetric and cover bidi and uni streams (#2632)

ianswett <> Thu, 18 April 2019 14:09 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB1C1120341 for <>; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 07:09:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8 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_32=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 65Ut_Qvae6ys for <>; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 07:09:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1ADFE12014A for <>; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 07:09:16 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 07:09:14 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1555596554; bh=Bz6odHJ0N024zeKvBws6Z4cC7klA1C5joqxQBdeDFjY=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=KHi6eXbGoNjKcl1/s+FWRZR1ZfuEkGzx3dZFaHPDqvzQHwJEmwxBmPwpU62YvYpMK kxCxsYVFnubEp+U39kERgbwu9J+jJOHebuywZKypz0aVllk5qO+vevDjr/lVErn53e WwZ3FRdDTuWaVQHpPpFq1bBrsTatcvAewpRlffYU=
From: ianswett <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2632/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] H3 GOAWAY should be symmetric and cover bidi and uni streams (#2632)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5cb8850aad8d4_35a63f96f1ccd96421808"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: ianswett
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: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:09:18 -0000

The salient comment from #696 for me is "I think that the GOAWAY frame needs to identify requests, not streams"

Making GOAWAY bidirectional and cover unidirectional and bidirectional streams seems to run counter to that statement, which is why it was starting to feel more transport-y.

But, I don't feel that strongly about this, unless it becomes an implementation hassle of some sort.

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