Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Replace CONNECTION_CLOSE with Public Reset (#353)

[Patrick McManus <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 12:13 PM, martinduke <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> We are not going to eliminate PUBLIC_RESET,


I don't take that as a given (its possible though).

1] in the absence of PR, things devolve to (high latency) timeouts. The
timeout paths are necessary anyhow as PR might not be delivered, though
obviously high latency is painful.

2] the primary use case for PR is "endpoint lost trust state and can't send
connection close". But you can trivially build something better than public
here (but worse than per connection).. handwave a public 'call me back with
a new connection and your connection ID and we'll form a new connection to
tell you the old one is lost' - at least that's verifiable as coming from
the right origin.

3] the other use case for PR is network signaling. Overloading that with
reset doesn't make a lot of sense to me - the right reaction to a middlebox
that indicates a path is no longer usable might very well be to try and
route around the middlebox - not accept the reset. Overloading
CONNECTION_CLOSE with PUBLIC_RESET means the endpoint can't make that
distinction.


-- 
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/353#issuecomment-283727431