IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Splitting transport and application error code spaces

Jana Iyengar <jri@google.com> Tue, 15 August 2017 00:00 UTC

Return-Path: <jri@google.com>
X-Original-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8517132455 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 17:00:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 utGHRA9Tygqz for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 17:00:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yw0-x234.google.com (mail-yw0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::234]) (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 1D09B132453 for <quic@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 17:00:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yw0-x234.google.com with SMTP id s143so64038797ywg.1 for <quic@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 17:00:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=jjcjzaiMZb7ji9voSuL7cgFYeqdvov0f8D7MI8hsqTU=; b=JXxIaQlCXcvnxPAo/7HWD8mIWjhS0/nmICrLCSuXEMLoJEie1qtZITfMgCyxMm8TEw tk0JKoBJXp9vgNdFFQT4nUmlSLhN+AnUgX25An2RlRvYY2nm9dg3N+B6+M9o4fYLF8lI vJEqolC7bIn6e6gw1STOVpdiRrSsG/o/MZm4VMGDG93tmdhkQRBncZVXTK4oKVDw2ZR9 OhV0fbBEjdmWcelJKAAPEJzmQ88P5Km280EQOaziItiigdqtrjAIqIGyEJXj/FPG+Cv1 GXEvQww7veCq1kIpjgoMkNWtYEvRIGD25mo0viBC2ud8e/W0DZJSBkRLCO0jHieRk/WC Ai5A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=jjcjzaiMZb7ji9voSuL7cgFYeqdvov0f8D7MI8hsqTU=; b=GWh+Du0Z3OUpc0i8x8zNOqoSWv1gAtQ8kBqywT74zXmwTrrk3EaqPS38l3qr+XXNeq MhtwNLYfgcExc54uXOKAy2FODAXbReaewyatGiB5/Yjd3/c0F1NiSGGak7acx3b4b6m0 fmb1kacGAlvtULPUGOlGl5Kz0b9CSGIrtrcmgtLJbaxFBgtX8ZPMTK/gcHUp30zHUVCK Q/1OBsQccSi0i0TewPJ2UxoN+O52HmETliIVDsi24vh3DXvsyZWJmTD+j0aATOslg0dn ao0KToNQkPmhZPHn6g79zx1JO4qbkTyyRXdjZMlmZsoUAU/ZfLDLBTnKq2gQC+SoWiRG fejA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHYfb5htUvAmdDFhkuolQkalq/7EKUZLr2DG5bj/zSZLkXqoEArGbbMk 9JvzIv5eJuoJ7zXj/esCza6sTmVgvmSV
X-Received: by 10.129.82.146 with SMTP id g140mr20986578ywb.466.1502755219555; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 17:00:19 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.37.170.207 with HTTP; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 17:00:18 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnU6gP++XeByfz3ML75VCuowrDA94DvjijZxL=sRCBiOSA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABkgnnXcjaqXeRLq=+W98HnubFSEy_DWB7PbaK8GEDUK+Wvetg@mail.gmail.com> <CY4PR21MB0136EE9B4C91C296860A38F687890@CY4PR21MB0136.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <CABkgnnU6gP++XeByfz3ML75VCuowrDA94DvjijZxL=sRCBiOSA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jana Iyengar <jri@google.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 17:00:18 -0700
Message-ID: <CAGD1bZYv8LDuyOH=tP1wDk+Ja+=Yy1MYAGLUxtyB2DpBLXdqwQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Splitting transport and application error code spaces
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Cc: Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>, QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114dceac0c642a0556bf77a2"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/GQP1Hp6x1h3PCvpiuSPSkUXVsDY>
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Main mailing list of the IETF QUIC working group <quic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 00:00:23 -0000

There's awkwardness in this enforcement. QUIC generates RST_STREAM when it
receives a STOP_SENDING frame, and this PR changes that function quite a
bit. Specifically, it requires that QUIC send RST_STREAM with an app error
code, where this RST_STREAM is in fact triggered by receipt of a
STOP_SENDING frame.

I'm not sure exactly what this split buys us... and it changes behavior on
receiving STOP_SENDING.


On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 3:04 AM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 12 August 2017 at 00:42, Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>
> wrote:
> > Given that the assigned 0x2 and 0x3 differ by one bit, might it be
> clearer
> > to have an embedded flag in CONNECTION_CLOSE indicating the source?  That
> > avoids having two frames with identical semantics except the registry in
> > which you look up the value of a field.
>
> It all amounts to the same thing, and I think that separate types is a
> better trend generally.  I'm not a huge fan of the mix of discrete
> types and bit patterns, preferring the former for the sake of clarity.
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email