IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] MAX_PUSH_ID: lower-than-previous value conn error seems too severe (#2412)

Lucas Pardue <notifications@github.com> Mon, 04 February 2019 23:07 UTC

Return-Path: <bounces+848413-a050-quic-issues=ietf.org@sgmail.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 67252127598 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 15:07:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.553
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.553 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-4.553, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 oWw7BWgDv54X for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 15:07:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from o11.sgmail.github.com (o11.sgmail.github.com [167.89.101.202]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9CC5512426E for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 15:07:09 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; h=from:reply-to:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:list-id:list-archive:list-post:list-unsubscribe; s=s20150108; bh=QSlcQT8yGQltjLinp/y0rHqvVGw=; b=i4mh//09rkQYPNQu 1o0DykPZGMOl3OsEZCpD7j2Gh4leaC0T6dl2A72dKQvvqeLBgXdxSMqfGqW+lioD Xf0Uk4LcMEKmMucClb5G7LnHGBNAS039DWubmzredU5Vo3udBKjKh5wsbU1PwDVk hL6O5NdK1oBxIUIHF5JMIRBELZs=
Received: by filter0771p1las1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter0771p1las1-3509-5C58C59C-16 2019-02-04 23:07:08.590608669 +0000 UTC m=+605542.765316483
Received: from github-lowworker-b40b5a4.cp1-iad.github.net (unknown [192.30.252.36]) by ismtpd0004p1iad1.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id wzCTkVKzSBCnkIMXcJnOfQ for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 04 Feb 2019 23:07:08.488 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from github.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by github-lowworker-b40b5a4.cp1-iad.github.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 754713E0D51 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 15:07:08 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2019 23:07:08 +0000
From: Lucas Pardue <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab17474aaf97b9c13a202c41cefcf719fd20730b6292cf000000011870879c92a169ce183b427c@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2412/460449754@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2412@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2412@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] MAX_PUSH_ID: lower-than-previous value conn error seems too severe (#2412)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c58c59c73545_2e703fb1b44d45b83654d5"; 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
X-SG-EID: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak1xi441iaTMTUXfCaOIsRZ1VliN95EdRpEKJF qm9e/MtJLi5XFao4uIkaBz7nIW6VYENzrJxzp8SytZjdrems1BPKXyoNXBzTXZWoBBSjducxReECqM FoV7lwwDjh/O9qva/CZOYiQDKw3fLRpKvW9AoXenoUcW3YK/0P6rbkx9xEYZNzU85RwGiuEL5TQbVa E=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/u0-3_qP7Km6ZgUh_iC7_I7ybHfc>
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, 04 Feb 2019 23:07:11 -0000

I see your point of view. The downside is that the client application layer needs to coordinate its sending of this frame to ensure the sequence is strictly growing - this constrains some of the design choices an implementation might choose to make. 

I question the severity because I don't know why a server would get so upset by seeing a value that is smaller than it had before. If the server is at the current max streams amount, it is unable to generate pushes until something increases the max. What could possibly go wrong? ™️ I don't want to fall into the trap of justifying ever decision but this one is not resonating with me probably because 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/issues/2412#issuecomment-460449754

v2.30.2 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status