Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PUSH_ID as a frame (#2526)

Luca Niccolini <> Mon, 18 March 2019 13:45 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1CA8129A87 for <>; Mon, 18 Mar 2019 06:45:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.002
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, 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 xiv8QGx5U-jp for <>; Mon, 18 Mar 2019 06:45:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 533D3127988 for <>; Mon, 18 Mar 2019 06:45:24 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 06:45:22 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1552916722; bh=GMhuFesJ92C6TpPvnvGWPvq8sMKI4AhxxXJFI8DlrxA=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=ERqNSp4tkIgu98DCVHICC9t2pz46Nk9yyG9FItGHko0PAfEjE3FrGRotDBvLTOx+0 Guf5sFFZrGVAqKpv+3GxVLXBdPPhIkWt1OyYozWOzdEC0cRiRmubgAP577Q6ukVeoW VJdQSImSO/CmtFWHuRHBBGsVyDi/dyRLEGV8DDK0=
From: Luca Niccolini <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2526/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PUSH_ID as a frame (#2526)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c8fa0f283973_12363fe5abcd45bc162570"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: lnicco
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: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 13:45:27 -0000

I was not trying to solve the same problem as #2527 here, but I was mentioning the fact that I believe framing would slightly help in a subset of cases. 
Take a server with a buggy push implementation, rather than a malicious one. Something that doesn't send the PUSH_ID at all. On the client you'll start seeing a flow of data and you can't do anything better than parsing the first few bytes of that as a PUSH_ID, and basically see random IDs. With Framing, if a server forgets to send the PUSH_ID, it is clear at the receiver that it is a protocol error.
That being said there are many other classes of bugs that may trigger the same behavior even with frames, so this is minor. 

> frame processing should only take place once the PUSH_PROMISE is received. 
@LPardue now, that seems like an implementation dependent claim :)
as #2527 says (and I like it) a client should buffer any data after receiving the PUSH_ID. and that is sufficient. no mention of frames there.

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