IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Rewrite Packet Size section (#2036)

Tom Jones <notifications@github.com> Thu, 22 November 2018 13:16 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 B64CA130ED6 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Nov 2018 05:16:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.46
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.46 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-1.46, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 mTmDe24gR50D for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Nov 2018 05:16:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-5.smtp.github.com (out-5.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB41A12F1A2 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Nov 2018 05:16:38 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2018 05:16:37 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1542892597; bh=VSGYes/H+/mpKxMGAofxiVB+YLeUqkw42uXDRYUagjk=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=sE3F59+Ma6Kb5t3n8u8tS8XU7nB2ULEtMIkprqAQcNccEeKtyilD6DDGdoZbUbPDf Ltmh+wWVB+3eZFg6eWWHw6EUFubDxyQC8WWD259L86G+zrV/w6+pZlEA3xvTZoPHCA gZ/thoAje1Kc9hejEfixkUBj6D5D2HmopLiA8GU4=
From: Tom Jones <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4abc4c14fb31cbea63d4aeeb35586cbaf3ddea8561a92cf00000001180e6e3592a169ce16d66007@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2036/review/177652066@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2036@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2036@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Rewrite Packet Size section (#2036)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5bf6ac35c55e0_7423ff6b7cd45b83045ed"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: adventureloop
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/7osylnraVwVr8oMm4RuI42Y329Q>
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: Thu, 22 Nov 2018 13:16:41 -0000

adventureloop commented on this pull request.



>  
-## Path Maximum Transmission Unit
+The PMTU is the maximum size of the entire IP datagram including the IP header,
+UDP header, and UDP payload.  The UDP payload includes the QUIC packet header,
+protected payload, and any authentication fields. This can be depend upon the
+current path characteristics.  Therefore, the current largest UDP payload an
+implementation will send is referred to as QUIC Maximum Packet Size (MPS).

We use term MPS in DPLPMTUD, we have found that keeping the various packet size
values straight is quite hard. It is easier to reason about the sizes when
you seperate away the path size (PMTU), the estimate of the path size and the
size the transport can send (MPS).

I would not object to using 'maximum packet size' rather than an acronym.


-- 
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/pull/2036#discussion_r235721462

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email