The client completed its request and closed without objecting, but the anomaly was written to the control stream — a unidirectional stream nothing obliges it to read on any schedule. A one-shot request can finish before that stream is picked up, so this is equally consistent with accepting the violation and with never having seen it, and neither can be told from here.
The suite could not establish what this client does here. That is a shortcoming of the run rather than anything about the client, and every one of these is on our list to remove.
What was measured
- Client
- aioquic — aioquic, 1.3.0
- Test
- Push stream opened for a push nobody allowed —
h-push-stream-unpromised - Clause
- RFC 9114 §6.2.2 (MUST)
- Class
- correctness — Rejected something invalid, with the code the RFC names.
- Required behaviour
- Close the connection with H3_ID_ERROR. §6.2.2 does not require the push to have been promised first — the stream alone is enough: a client "MUST treat receipt of a push stream as a connection error of type H3_ID_ERROR when no MAX_PUSH_ID frame has been sent", and no client under test sends one. Distinct from the PUSH_PROMISE test, which puts the same violation in a frame on the control stream. This one opens the push stream itself, which a client has to recognise by its stream type before any frame inside it is read.
- Measured
- 2026-09-18
Reproduce it
The suite is the judge, so the reproduction is to point the same client at the same test and let the server report what it saw.
SESSION=$(curl -sX POST https://conformance.pqcrypta.com/session | jq -r .id)
# then drive aioquic at the test URL and read the verdict:
curl -s https://conformance.pqcrypta.com/report/$SESSION.json | jq '.results["h-push-stream-unpromised"]'