Re: Why allow empty STREAM frames when offset is zero?

[Patrick McManus <[e-mail]>]

maybe its the only way to get more stream id flow control credits :)

On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 8:45 PM, Dmitri Tikhonov <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> Is there a real-life use case that is implied here?  I can't see why it
> would be useful.
>
> On the other hand, it creates an odd situation for an implementation:
> a frame has arrived, yet the higher layer cannot read from it yet, so
> an incoming stream is unreadable.
>
> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 06:25:55PM +0000, Mike Bishop wrote:
> > If you want to open a stream (e.g. permit data to be sent in the
> opposite direction of a bidirectional stream), but don't actually have data
> ready to send yet.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: QUIC [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Dmitri Tikhonov
> > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2018 11:05 AM
> > To: IETF QUIC WG <[e-mail]>
> > Subject: Why allow empty STREAM frames when offset is zero?
> >
> > [draft-ietf-quic-transport-11] says the following:
> >
> >    A stream frame's Stream Data MUST NOT be empty, unless the offset is
> >    0 or the FIN bit is set.
> >
> > Why allow empty STREAM frames when the offset is zero?  What is the
> purpose?
> >
> >   - Dmitri.
> >
>
>