IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Specify push stream truncated last frame error. (#2722)

Daan De Meyer <notifications@github.com> Mon, 20 May 2019 18:26 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 7932D120044 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 May 2019 11:26:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.607
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.607 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] 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 FMFcR3wqAJqM for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 May 2019 11:26:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-5.smtp.github.com (out-5.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C6CA120026 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 May 2019 11:26:16 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 20 May 2019 11:26:15 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1558376775; bh=2HOyCSDNYUzngPbBSRKUm10EW+9zaqhU1roRDXVPPiE=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=qP6ev22teD36FYkExjzjYAIlfb9g3s1odvSnKi3aP82N7dBrFN+HNyCaxpfn8nJP/ xQiRQyzZyGWiNlWDrnb4pH//fX+K8I/2liFosom3OOFSM0+aUHyOXKYlO3l87IvQWa aB3cF8AaQDCaKOLb9AZ5UyA9ss6vfxt0z2ep5qHc=
From: Daan De Meyer <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK7AOYEUJRKYYYGNTRN26AR4PEVBNHHBVDXTWQ@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2722/c494099043@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2722@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2722@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Specify push stream truncated last frame error. (#2722)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5ce2f14721cfe_65a53fd8582cd95c9729f6"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: DaanDeMeyer
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/kzvYNoo4P1nmg05mO7aEh-G7tzk>
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: Mon, 20 May 2019 18:26:18 -0000

I hadn't seen that paragraph yet. I'd propose to drop the text in the Bidirectional Streams section.

The reasoning is that when searching for what to do when a stream is closed with a truncated frame, I found (or rather was pointed to) the text in the Bidirectional Streams section. After finding a paragraph like that, I didn't expect to find any other text in the rfc related to truncated frames (which led to this pr). Without the text in the Bidirectional Streams section, I might have found the text in the Frame Layout section first which would have immediately answered my question.

This would also consolidate errors related to frames in the HTTP Framing Layer section which seems like the first place to go looking for frame related errors.

Should I make another pr (if this sounds like a good idea) or update this one with the proposed change?

-- 
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/pull/2722#issuecomment-494099043

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email