Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PTO MUST send new data or retransmit data if possible (#3057)

Benjamin Saunders <> Tue, 24 September 2019 02:06 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B98671200DF for <>; Mon, 23 Sep 2019 19:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.495
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.495 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_28=1.404, 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
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WSo9bIiLVg0T for <>; Mon, 23 Sep 2019 19:06:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BAB821200E0 for <>; Mon, 23 Sep 2019 19:06:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03FA56E04D1 for <>; Mon, 23 Sep 2019 19:06:14 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2019 19:06:13 -0700
From: Benjamin Saunders <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3057/review/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PTO MUST send new data or retransmit data if possible (#3057)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5d897a15e9ae7_301d3f84502cd9685836a"; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: Ralith
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, 24 Sep 2019 02:06:17 -0000

Ralith commented on this pull request.

> @@ -526,15 +524,16 @@ as a probe, unless there is no data available to send.  An endpoint MAY send up
 to two full-sized datagrams containing ack-eliciting packets, to avoid an
 expensive consecutive PTO expiration due to a single lost datagram.
-It is possible that the sender has no new or previously-sent data to send.  As
-an example, consider the following sequence of events: new application data is
-sent in a STREAM frame, deemed lost, then retransmitted in a new packet, and
-then the original transmission is acknowledged.  In the absence of any new
-application data, a PTO timer expiration now would find the sender with no new
-or previously-sent data to send.
+When the PTO timer expires, and there is new or previously sent data, it MUST

Does "previously sent" here mean in-flight/unacknowledged, or literally any historical data?

Does "data" mean ack-eliciting frames specifically?

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