Hi, I noticed that functions for canceling asynchronous operations or closing objects on which they are executed are documented as being possible to fail. This is the case at least for the acceptor objects (basic_socket_acceptor or ip::tcp::acceptor), socket objects (basic_socket or ip::tcp::socket) and even timer objects (deadline_timer or steady_timer). In this case what are the options for implementing commit-rollback for asynchronous operations? By rollback I mean canceling a successfully started first operation in case a second operation in the batch of operations fails (as exemplified in the attached test code). As described in [1] a rollback operation absolutely relies on no-throw operations. What is supposed to happen with the handler associated with the asynchronous operation that failed to be canceled? Handlers, most often, at least for non-trivial programs are carrying shared resources with them and, if not called, may leave the application in a hanged state waiting for an event that will never come. I didn't find in the documentation any guarantees given regarding the handlers associated with the async-operations that they can or cannot be lost (that is never called). This of course, as long as io_service::run is running or the control returns to it after an exception. Also, as shown in [2] and as demonstrated by the attached test program, at least for async_write, invoking the destructor of an object on top of which asynchronous operations are being executed is not correct either and may lead to undefined behavior (crash). [1] Exception-Safety in Generic Components; section 6 http://www.boost.org/community/exception_safety.html [2] BoostCon 2011: Thinking Asynchronously; slide 47 https://github.com/boostcon/2011_presentations/raw/master/mon/thinking_async... Thank you, Sorin Fetche