IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Split error codes in two

"Philipp S. Tiesel" <phils@in-panik.de> Wed, 06 September 2017 09:17 UTC

Return-Path: <phils@in-panik.de>
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 65FCA1323B4 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Sep 2017 02:17:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 tSzwX9cgNoZd for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Sep 2017 02:17:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from einhorn-mail.in-berlin.de (einhorn-mail.in-berlin.de [217.197.80.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0D47132623 for <quic@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Sep 2017 02:17:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Envelope-From: phils@in-panik.de
Received: from x-berg.in-berlin.de (x-change.in-berlin.de [217.197.86.40]) by einhorn.in-berlin.de (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-8+deb8u2) with ESMTP id v869G7WG000473 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 6 Sep 2017 11:16:07 +0200
Received: from [2001:638:809:ff1f::8295:dc3a] by x-berg.in-berlin.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <phils@in-panik.de>) id 1dpWR3-0005K7-QP; Wed, 06 Sep 2017 11:15:49 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Subject: Re: Split error codes in two
From: "Philipp S. Tiesel" <phils@in-panik.de>
In-Reply-To: <CAGD1bZZZG9L0_d7Tmo8vfdAx+=LU+yi97N42vKFGo82K16Zycw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2017 11:16:06 +0200
Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Victor Vasiliev <vasilvv@google.com>, QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>, Nick Harper <nharper@google.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <05505C10-8737-4C58-BC91-E401D2659AF0@in-panik.de>
References: <CABkgnnWwGAyHzkST9o9ueVmBw3_TpJun=dv2X+HL2snXSZJgew@mail.gmail.com> <CAAZdMafBWFWtC7A60P1CMm_6nUnbW+_Tx_7re1bAo7Vx2kLdcA@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnWphw3k=f3==2y3AhexQCj9Py50SLSEH06nN3MN0SCerQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAAZdMacHC1HKhXMR4G9CKUOmYyQMsQBab+tampP-PG6n_jJZoA@mail.gmail.com> <CACdeXiLS7W8cJbnT=orHkcd9reH=8QqhOzxWnUEpWZmfcdvd2g@mail.gmail.com> <CAGD1bZa-h0ZVh7kUYQtG3r93eH6TqRXnQ6YXAcscCrCQHk8LeA@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnXMFUP_c+2r6YeJouJXanHd8tFcqDKgU=C9UF0stPcXOw@mail.gmail.com> <CAGD1bZZZG9L0_d7Tmo8vfdAx+=LU+yi97N42vKFGo82K16Zycw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jana Iyengar <jri@google.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/nW-h5JZJnoG-lIURPfn1SW-zh9k>
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: Wed, 06 Sep 2017 09:17:14 -0000

> On 6. Sep 2017, at 03:12, Jana Iyengar <jri@google.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 6:10 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 10:59 AM, Jana Iyengar <jri@google.com> wrote:
>>> In the current draft, we've already changed that requirement: the
>>> application is expected to generate a RST_STREAM in response to a received
>>> RST_STREAM.
>>> 
>> That text was removed with the addition of STOP_SENDING.  (Or at least
>> I couldn't find it).  I think that's the right answer, because this
>> will be entirely discretionary on the part of applications.
>> 
> Yup, I was just pointing out the reasons that we don't need RST_STREAM to be a transport directive.

RST_STREAM is also referenced in the "Stream Errors” section and still makes sense for transport errors only effecting a single stream

Removing RST_STREAM also means making all errors effecting just a single stream connection errors leading to teardown of the whole connection.

AVE!
  Philipp S. Tiesel / phils…

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email