IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] HTTP/3 Client handling of SERVER_BUSY error code needs to be specified (#2699)

Lucas Pardue <notifications@github.com> Thu, 23 May 2019 17:33 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 D58101200EA for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 May 2019 10:33:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.464
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.464 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_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, 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 O6ieFfUKnYw1 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 May 2019 10:33:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-21.smtp.github.com (out-21.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.204]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 60445120099 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 May 2019 10:33:49 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 10:33:47 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1558632827; bh=NGBY87ujkUu/8Pj/vWiQGbDuPCooU+I0cYWHb7R5puQ=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=WyDKy2X/X3egwd73H9lY78hGU7gV9rrRs8xWlvU4ci/GJBvOIp5mxZdpsd/yUVrny MxwJF/IGR0/t8WdMH/YL98cJmA6Tlmm7hIihPhsjR3KclvvVndNgzuU2aV0uDMELmE LSeuTOXbiaC5dqgpVQF9Sg0+jyEZ/Mik+KKlu890=
From: Lucas Pardue <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK7UXWYYUBQNPJYLHLF26QF7XEVBNHHBU6IQGY@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2699/495313038@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2699@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2699@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] HTTP/3 Client handling of SERVER_BUSY error code needs to be specified (#2699)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5ce6d97b5d568_6c2d3fc6b44cd9606910e0"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: LPardue
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/rE3IpElzjvlb4LVZ1ea9x6GGxmY>
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, 23 May 2019 17:33:52 -0000

Still disagree. As Mark highlighted in the inteeim session, the collection of HTTP documents already has a lot of existing language around the problem of how a endpoints can react to lower layer errors.

Recommending any specific behavior for H3 just complicates the overall narrative. 

Perhaps there is space for a more general description, like a BCP, in a separate document that applies to the HTTP semantic. 

-- 
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/2699#issuecomment-495313038

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email