Subject: [core] #225: Explain why it is not always possible to react to a RST that is in reply to a NON

From: "core issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 16:13:39 -0000

#225: Explain why it is not always possible to react to a RST that is in reply to
a NON

 Cullen Jennings notes (msg03073e):

 Last paragraph of section 4.2 says MAY remove but I think this needs to be
 a MUST remove.

 ->

 No, this is indeed intended to be MAY.
 We want to make the need to store state for a NON optional.
 A sender of a NON message may discard the MID state for that message
 whenever it wants.
 That may make acting on a RST to that MID impossible.
 Hence MAY.

 -> change the wording to make it clearer that we expect (as a quality of
 implementation issue) a server that still happens to have the state to
 also react to the RST.

-- 
-----------------------------+---------------------------------------
 Reporter:  cabo@…           |      Owner:  draft-ietf-core-observe@…
     Type:  editorial        |     Status:  new
 Priority:  minor            |  Milestone:  post-WGLC-1
Component:  observe          |    Version:  observe-05
 Severity:  In WG Last Call  |   Keywords:
-----------------------------+---------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/core/trac/ticket/225>
core <http://tools.ietf.org/core/>

---

From: Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 14:30:14 -0600

What I am wondering about is the case where a A has a subscription to B. B is sending a series of NON responses to A. If A sends  a RST, the subscription needs to be canceled. 

On Apr 20, 2012, at 10:13 , core issue tracker wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> core mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core