Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Remap STOPPING to something other than zero (#1804)

Nick Banks <> Wed, 26 September 2018 16:14 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BF70130EDF for <>; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 09:14:29 -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, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, 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 calKopY3rxlI for <>; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 09:14:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 51F9F130EE9 for <>; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 09:14:27 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 09:14:26 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1537978466; bh=ggRHCEdk2rwXCOX8UV116OQX0woZJZn1E0HyVSAGsaQ=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=ckHXF4fh8KJ54HTSXdMjJfFTNUimLEz5Ce6UTQ2qre7ZOmJJtbJwQXRzso5RDu/Lb DvlvjiEqUjJN5Y9ccP1MR+Y8z1mMFCCSGj/3696CAiCarqrveZRavaVi7JkdmoXm+i Du3tF+R9Q4q+2hgk9ELW/zVgB3q7+6bT0HA7HT0Q=
From: Nick Banks <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1804/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Remap STOPPING to something other than zero (#1804)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5babb062568f6_3c33fd6ee6d45c011238d"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: nibanks
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: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 16:14:29 -0000

Ideally, I'd leave the entire space for the application layer. I just looked through the spec and it receiver of a RST_STREAM with STOPPING error code doesn't seem to do anything special, compared to receiving a RST_STREAM with any other error code. The goal of the STOP_SENDING frame is just to get your peer to RST_STREAM the stream. The best I could come up with is that if you get a STOPPING error code, you don't pass that up to the app layer directly, and internally just treat it as a confirmation of your STOP_SENDING. But, at least with my implementation, if the app layer has already shutdown it's receive direction on a stream, and I receive any RST_STREAM, I never indicate the event up, because it was shutdown locally first. With that design, the actual error code becomes irrelevant.

That being said, if someone comes up with a valid reason to keep a specific STOPPING error code, I'd prefer to use 0xFFFF instead of 0, 1 or any other value.

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