Re: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel-04.txt

Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org> Wed, 06 March 2013 15:53 UTC

Return-Path: <randell-ietf@jesup.org>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDE3321F8C9F for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Mar 2013 07:53:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DWlOVbpoxgOt for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Mar 2013 07:53:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from r2-chicago.webserversystems.com (r2-chicago.webserversystems.com [173.236.101.58]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5285521F8A2A for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Mar 2013 07:53:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pool-98-111-140-34.phlapa.fios.verizon.net ([98.111.140.34]:1881 helo=[192.168.1.12]) by r2-chicago.webserversystems.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <randell-ietf@jesup.org>) id 1UDGek-000AUy-Ga for rtcweb@ietf.org; Wed, 06 Mar 2013 09:53:26 -0600
Message-ID: <51376643.8090204@jesup.org>
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2013 10:52:35 -0500
From: Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130215 Thunderbird/17.0.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <20130225224014.18570.20111.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <39821B4C400EC14DAD4DB25330A9271A0191D3@FR711WXCHMBA03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <5135C64A.50302@jesup.org> <39821B4C400EC14DAD4DB25330A9271A02108E@FR711WXCHMBA02.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <51371E4A.4040602@ericsson.com> <39821B4C400EC14DAD4DB25330A9271A0214C1@FR711WXCHMBA02.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com>
In-Reply-To: <39821B4C400EC14DAD4DB25330A9271A0214C1@FR711WXCHMBA02.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - r2-chicago.webserversystems.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - jesup.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel-04.txt
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2013 15:53:27 -0000

On 3/6/2013 7:08 AM, MARCON, JEROME (JEROME) wrote:
> But then - and given that DATA_CHANNEL_OPEN_RESPONSE no longer exists in this new draft version - I wonder how the peer can reject an incoming DATA_CHANNEL_OPEN message signaling a 'subprotocol' it does not support.

channel.close();

I.e. there's no explicit prior-to-connect rejection, you simply state 
instead "I'm not interested" and close it.  This resets the streams, and 
causes the other side to be notified of the close. You're correct in 
that this is not distinguished from other reasons to close() it; if 
those are needed you should either negotiate it out-of-band, or make a 
rejection part of the protocol you run over it.  This is entirely within 
the application's domain.  Most applications would have no need for this.

-- 
Randell Jesup
randell-ietf@jesup.org