Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Consider a specific error when switching to an HTTP/3 connection that does not support an extension (#3833)

Mike Bishop <notifications@github.com> Thu, 09 July 2020 20:07 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@github.com>
X-Original-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60BB43A05A4 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 13:07:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.555
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.555 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, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=github.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SlboR8bja8Yr for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 13:07:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-18.smtp.github.com (out-18.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C4EB13A059F for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 13:07:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-fb56993.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-fb56993.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.19.31]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE84B6E1136 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 13:07:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1594325274; bh=oEd/Qw0Uyy6EaEvkbfEZhlvSIBZ3Jm6zLqv1BL+dyQU=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=SogZL/F63TLT7yNNIO4Gc52Ye4bcOFWTANitLfPhWMaKyEi5zaJedIgUZoFDpm4aS YaeAcKI1LnrUacGF197i/Xa7amzZYLqN1xAjIDcJc+zEMLXHqsToGvw6PZtFP4ZHPO LRajymTypzYaNkJLdU8eNMcknuwgGGjoqs1590zw=
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2020 13:07:54 -0700
From: Mike Bishop <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK33VYAVKHGO6S3IFOF5CNNBVEVBNHHCNZ746I@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3833/656325857@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3833@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3833@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Consider a specific error when switching to an HTTP/3 connection that does not support an extension (#3833)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5f07791aced57_5a223ff029ecd96c26969"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: MikeBishop
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/eeU0a-N9O6Jg_8IFeEpjpc4IugU>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <quic-issues.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic-issues/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic-issues@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2020 20:07:57 -0000

This basically boils down to discovery that the indicated alternative is not, in fact, equivalent in some way that the client cares about.  That might be different extensions, different security parameters, even location in a different political jurisdiction.  (If you send me an alternative that turns out to be in China or Russia, I might not opt to use that one.)  I'm sure there are other ways for an alternative to be unacceptable that we haven't thought of.

I'm not sure it's profitable to go specify distinct error codes for them.  Clients just bounce back to origin if it finds the alternative unacceptable.

-- 
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/3833#issuecomment-656325857