Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Changing the Default QUIC ACK Policy (#3529)

[Gorry Fairhurst <[e-mail]>]

Yes, our proposal counted ACK-eliciting packets at the receiver (because 
the receiver does not in general know the congestion state, so you need 
a heuristic), and we finally chose the same method in currect QUIC 
Chromium - i.e. for the first 100 packets we do not use ACK 1:10, 
changing only after 100 packets.

Gorry

On 28/04/2020 13:34, IngJohEricsson wrote:
> Hi
>
>
>
> I believe that it is beneficial to use a 1:10 policy, I understand 
> that this means that a 1:2 policy that still be used in the initial 
> phase (flow start) or does the timer mechanisms kick in to avoid that 
> ACKs are transmitted too sparsely in this case ?.
>
>
>
> /Ingemar
>
>
>
> From: Gorry Fairhurst <[e-mail]>
> Sent: den 28 april 2020 13:38
> To: quicwg/base-drafts <[e-mail]>
> Cc: Ingemar Johansson S <[e-mail]>; Comment 
> <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Changing the Default QUIC ACK Policy 
> (#3529)
>
>
>
> On 27/04/2020 17:19, Lars Eggert wrote:
>
> > Folks who care about a change here need to prioritize progressing this
> > issue. We're close to being able to last-call the specs, and would
> > like this resolved in time.
> >
> > —
> > You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > 
> <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3529#issuecomment-620088318 
> <https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=b82acfbc-e4a36075-b82a8f27-0cc47ad93e1c-7966577c56c12be6&q=1&e=3996eab0-a615-40ad-8b7d-b572a1fd4189&u=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fquicwg%2Fbase-drafts%2Fissues%2F3529%23issuecomment-620088318> 
> >,
> > or unsubscribe
> > 
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABYLLETADUCHE7WAN5IFIWDROWWBNANCNFSM4LOJ4RQA 
> <https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=d1f11561-8d78baa8-d1f155fa-0cc47ad93e1c-a2e73379d4d76bf3&q=1&e=3996eab0-a615-40ad-8b7d-b572a1fd4189&u=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fnotifications%2Funsubscribe-auth%2FABYLLETADUCHE7WAN5IFIWDROWWBNANCNFSM4LOJ4RQA> 
> >.
> >
> We’ve completed a round of updated analysis of the proposed change to
> the QUIC spec, using quicly (changing to a 1:10 policy), and chromium
> (which currently does 1:10 by default). Our hope is that this change to
> the spec, to actually make standard end-to-end QUIC work better than
> TCP over asymmetric paths!
>
> This is a short slide deck about the performance of the proposed change:
> https://erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/gorry/ietf/QUIC/QUIC-ack10-24-april-00.pdf
>
> There have been a number of other change made by the QUIC ID editors
> relating to ACK processing, so we wanted to be sure these results were
> up to date. (These results do not consider additional ACKs after
> re-ordering - reflecting the latest text removing that.)
>
> We also really hope this will motivate a change the practice of forcing
> of QUIC fallback to TCP (with PEP/Thining) over highly asymmetric paths.
> People may also be interested in work for L4S to evaluate the impact of
> ACK Thining for TCP-Prague.
>
> Please do provide feedback, or any questions on this - as Lars notes, we
> think the time is running out for considering new changes, even
> relatively simple ones like this.
>
> Gorry
>
> P.S. First email:
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/NZBbuY88v0lrVspQE2A5br83asA/
>
>
>
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you commented.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub 
> <https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=9d433096-c1ca9f5f-9d43700d-0cc47ad93e1c-30eb55b8449f0bee&q=1&e=3996eab0-a615-40ad-8b7d-b572a1fd4189&u=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fquicwg%2Fbase-drafts%2Fissues%2F3529%23issuecomment-620551738> 
> , or unsubscribe 
> <https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=fbb00142-a739ae8b-fbb041d9-0cc47ad93e1c-d874a6a9da42014c&q=1&e=3996eab0-a615-40ad-8b7d-b572a1fd4189&u=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fnotifications%2Funsubscribe-auth%2FACRZ2GD2F3JDT6LI5Q4A2NTRO25YTANCNFSM4LOJ4RQA> 
> . 
> <https://github.com/notifications/beacon/ACRZ2GETA2BOY6L5IISTQD3RO25YTA5CNFSM4LOJ4RQKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOET6N4OQ.gif> 
>
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub 
> <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3529#issuecomment-620577062>, 
> or unsubscribe 
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABYLLEQBOCAEWPFNFDLHIRLRO3EMFANCNFSM4LOJ4RQA>.
>
-- 
G. Fairhurst, School of Engineering



-- 
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/3529#issuecomment-620592559