Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Add bidirectional streams on top of unidirectional (#720)

[MikkelFJ <[e-mail]>]

mikkelfj commented on this pull request.



> +This document doesn't proscribe the use of the Related Stream ID field, leaving
+decisions about the semantics of related streams to protocols that use QUIC.
+Protocols that use QUIC MUST either define the semantics of related streams or
+prohibit the use of the Related Stream ID field.  Protocols MAY define other
+uses for the Related Stream ID field, but are advised that complex relationships
+between streams could be poorly supported in generic QUIC implementations.  The
+INVALID_RELATED_STREAM error code can be used by protocols to signal receipt of
+invalid Related Stream ID field values, unless the protocol defines a more
+specific error code for the circumstances.
+
+The Related Stream ID for a stream only needs to be sent once for each (allowing
+for retransmissions due to loss).  Sending the field on all stream frames with
+an offset of 0 ensures that the value is received without duplicating the field
+unnecessarily.  If the value of the Related Stream ID changes for a stream, the
+endpoint that receives the conflicting value MUST treat this as a connection
+error of type INVALID_RELATED_STREAM.

My initial comment was thinking about packet duplicates which is not reasonable since frames are retransmitted independently of packets. However, each steam has its own retransmission filter and here  I believe the same applies: already received content should be ignored - it is not reasonable to check all received retransmission for inconsistencies, and related stream ID would just be a special case - unless I am missing something?

-- 
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/720#discussion_r132633408