Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Handling connectionless protocols #1140

Closed
mwelzl opened this issue May 9, 2023 · 0 comments · Fixed by #1175
Closed

Handling connectionless protocols #1140

mwelzl opened this issue May 9, 2023 · 0 comments · Fixed by #1175

Comments

@mwelzl
Copy link
Contributor

mwelzl commented May 9, 2023

4.6. Handling connectionless protocols

The nuances of connectionless protocols also are discussed in
sec. 4.4.1 para. 1 and the part of the paragraph discussed above. It
may be an improvement to gather all that information into this
section.

Also, these considerations apply to any handshake-less protocol.
E.g. there probably is no guarantee that a server will accept another
stream on a multiplexed connection. So it may be worth introducing
the class "handshake-less protocol" explicitly.

To mitigate this, an
application can use a Message Framer (Section 6) on top of a
connectionless protocol to only mark a specific connection attempt as
ready when some data has been received, or after some application-
level handshake has been performed.

Of course, a Message Framer is just another protocol layered on top.
In this instance, the point is that it presents to the application a
protocol with handshake but it uses a protocol without a handshake.
You might want to state that explicitly.


From the review by Dale Worley: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/bpBk8QxZMLksr3ZuROtf2_BXYdI/
Note that indentation was lost by copy+pasting here - look at the edited version or the version at the URL to get a clearer view of what is being quoted.

@abrunstrom abrunstrom linked a pull request Jun 3, 2023 that will close this issue
tfpauly added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 3, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants