Re: RST_STREAM(OK) after an HTTP response

Matthew,

On 9 Oct 2014, at 3:25 am, Matthew Cox <macox@microsoft.com> wrote:

> This is still a -1 from our side.
> 
> Does RST_STREAM with NO_ERROR transition state to "closed", or is this a new state?

I really don't see how you can read it as creating a new state -- what in the proposal leads you to that impression?


> Obviously all data up to the other side's window must be allowed (because it may already be in flight), but will the receiver keep opening window after sending this new kind of RST_STREAM?

The proposal isn't for a new kind of RST_STREAM; it only illustrates how the frame interacts with HTTP semantics in a particular situation.


> The way it reads right now, it almost sounds like RST_STREAM (NO_ERROR) is advisory and doesn't transition the stream to the terminal state.  

How do you get that? It currently reads:

> Clients MUST NOT discard responses as a result of receiving RST_STREAM in the corresponding "half-closed (remote)" state.


> If this is the case then there is a simple workaround for us; we just ignore RST_STREAM (NO_ERROR).

I think you've misunderstood the proposal. The recipient of *any* RST_STREAM is required to process it as per <http://http2.github.io/http2-spec/#RST_STREAM>, with the specified effects upon stream state. If you ignore the RST_STREAM, your implementation will not be conformant. 

This specifically includes:

> After receiving a RST_STREAM on a stream, the receiver MUST NOT send additional frames for that stream, with the exception of PRIORITY.

Cheers,


> 
> Matthew
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Nottingham [mailto:mnot@mnot.net] 
> Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2014 3:51 PM
> To: Martin Thomson
> Cc: Greg Wilkins; Osama Mazahir; Jeff Pinner; Matthew Cox; Michaela LaVan; Mike Bishop; HTTP Working Group
> Subject: Re: RST_STREAM(OK) after an HTTP response
> 
> Thanks. I think we're close to consensus on this -- anyone have further questions / pushback?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> 
> On 8 Oct 2014, at 9:02 am, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 6 October 2014 23:15, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
>>> Martin, can you please prepare a pull request here?
>> 
>> https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/pull/624
> 
> --
> Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
> 
> 

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/

Received on Sunday, 12 October 2014 06:52:09 UTC