Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] is persistent congestion per pn_space? (#2649)

ianswett <> Wed, 24 April 2019 13:37 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC6781200DE for <>; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 06:37:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.597
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.597 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_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 nRk1XgLX82nT for <>; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 06:37:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D410120020 for <>; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 06:37:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed;; h=from:reply-to:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:list-id:list-archive:list-post:list-unsubscribe; s=s20150108; bh=oXlGQKKlRps5p9mL7apRSw23A/w=; b=D/cY6E/qfTfE6kfX L2ZBcupUytR2yp8v7zpXGqCa5ewnxWgSkQTj5N09yS2F1NUMfChM3BRoWtq+uZZq sJTy83tGNcHdX95IXlqxNGsPbASMn4OQiEoAKIIA2CS9fNgHubwsYeFWSPI9HBmc 9fjNOJtX33BRBGRkxaLetJVpoIE=
Received: by with SMTP id filter0732p1las1-29761-5CC0668F-2B 2019-04-24 13:37:19.630895383 +0000 UTC m=+134470.724208906
Received: from (unknown []) by (SG) with ESMTP id Rq694AG7RRGAC-bux2iLeA for <>; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 13:37:19.539 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69571360048 for <>; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 06:37:19 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 13:37:19 +0000
From: ianswett <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2649/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] is persistent congestion per pn_space? (#2649)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5cc0668f67b39_79943f948c2cd96c2860fe"; 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-SG-EID: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak0q+yal8aJcE9oOKOG+cDMZpRCVVHOrIDizr+ NtQKibMFF19wITFG+5LIU1QrrF2m41ExQ0lebaOTmAezWEz+tnvWfNDS99sFGnNy+ssB3FH4fdUQ3W d1oOaSmNo9WvaA+a8dlqODrabZWetVqLndGRNXKlpS1u3hQp7CN/cpPZzUmqyT/dYoE+8NNnjKtDVE U=
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: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 13:37:23 -0000

I think it should only be for ApplicationData, and say that we expect the handshake timeout to be smaller than the persistent congestion threshold, so it does not need to apply to Initial or Handshake spaces.

Prior to the persistent congestion concept, RTOs(and then consecutive PTOs) were used as a signal of persistent congestion, and the RTO and PTO alarm are only active when the crypto handshake alarm is not, so I think saying it's ApplicationData only is keeping with the original design.

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