Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] DetectLostPackets not called in anti-deadlock case (#3298)

Jana Iyengar <> Tue, 17 December 2019 04:45 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DF72120131 for <>; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 20:45:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.454
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.454 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, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g3HHvNgm2tpu for <>; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 20:45:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B60A81200A3 for <>; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 20:45:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2031C60618 for <>; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 20:45:22 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1576557922; bh=AuqgIMg2DZMi1SC3OQ9IE/aU37mUXuWC+I/9yIMvvKY=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=hKdov1Bz4qW1KvhaJK6+e6WO6XKwkgxnqwrvTSr4F3PYnVO/+lVr8itjgPfpgxXpy WWEOr/TOKy2emuPbZjOxdOaTk9CdwqVV+Mx4s9XYvfYsIpmJTBDSrHIMe2ASRopziF 8wg3qDxjUk3FaE6JE/ubR4L+9GDlUQ5lWtF/xDAo=
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 20:45:22 -0800
From: Jana Iyengar <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3298/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] DetectLostPackets not called in anti-deadlock case (#3298)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5df85d62d2ea8_512a3fe7634cd9681806c7"; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: janaiyengar
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:45:26 -0000

I suspect this is a special case. Our model has been to not mark anything as lost until we've received an ACK for something after it.  I can see that you might have a bit of a cost in following this model with your implementation. Calling DetectLostPackets() there if you'd like as an optimization for your case, I don't think you break anything by doing it.

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: