IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Including ACK delay in packet loss detection time threshold (#3951)

ianswett <notifications@github.com> Fri, 24 July 2020 17:12 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@github.com>
X-Original-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABE923A102F for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 10:12:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.009
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.009 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=github.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zo2g_bjKnWMe for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 10:12:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-24.smtp.github.com (out-24.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.207]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B3C733A1009 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 10:12:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-52827f8.ash1-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-52827f8.ash1-iad.github.net [10.56.108.24]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D217D600E1F for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 10:12:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1595610762; bh=EZ6jchkHBe2E0oLDNUStlnoiYuxm1ZYK+19E+YhUTN8=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=awpn5W1HY71G8NAuF6nOst3G9MxKeO3ht/guqaKXkTEfSciRAJ6JrthbqbEnUTcW9 ePRlA+bUHvey450Dg5LtSxUICaBo7EMrbzUwGfdRJeUuJqSE1OAy56lxbQmcBoIKks M1mvNxwhZJYmkRwnQk3VkU61sFaI+ilEWvaD1Fm4=
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 10:12:42 -0700
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK3F5FN3CC6X67YAL2V5E33YVEVBNHHCPGTYQE@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3951/663641541@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3951@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3951@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Including ACK delay in packet loss detection time threshold (#3951)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5f1b168ac2d2f_3c353fa62b4cd9641454fc"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: ianswett
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/1wz_xE79rw6_JfBbWkWLv_U4as4>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <quic-issues.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic-issues/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic-issues@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 17:12:46 -0000

max_ack_delay isn't included in time threshold loss detection because the transport document says you need to acknowledge packets which were previously missing immediately and that out of order packets are acknowledged immediately.  So not including it is because it's not necessary to include it, and including it would slow down loss detection, in some cases substantially.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3951#issuecomment-663641541

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email