Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Add a section on flow control performance (#3793)

ianswett <notifications@github.com> Thu, 09 July 2020 14:01 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 B08F03A0B55 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 07:01:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.101
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.101 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, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 jbl8k3E1eSC9 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 07:01:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-19.smtp.github.com (out-19.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.202]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9CC283A0B19 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 07:01:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-b19c547.va3-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-b19c547.va3-iad.github.net [10.48.17.66]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA3AE521EAC for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 07:01:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1594303278; bh=C66v78PYk2ZgOiyOczhD+GFveOrR3FVrX9JKaH4gr8w=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=qypAGiUjo08EDtqqr41Ush/CNA45q06AptP/ztTCMUYfUwc0gqbJYU9TIkoM+MpEt 61jw8CvIRcmwzjFDMeEgO15Zokhz+cfTkUNNx4KnUxjNdZ9TMZ04bEFoAI9y7ROImj kMyj0Vp0USoPcMaLqTWitn+HcS9M5Yd0rDgZxX84=
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2020 07:01:18 -0700
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJKYE35DT6QV7G5S6G355CMCC5EVBNHHCNAR3C4@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3793/review/445637439@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3793@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3793@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Add a section on flow control performance (#3793)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5f07232ebbfe6_2f4c3fab754cd96024852e"; 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-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/CMWmY6U90s1F7jH6wrh7ArjTkMQ>
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, 09 Jul 2020 14:01:22 -0000

@ianswett commented on this pull request.



> +order of the current BDP will have receive throughput limited by flow control
+and not other limiting factors like congestion control.  Timely sending of

Congestion controllers sometimes do silly things, so I'd simplify this, but add an additional consideration.

```suggestion
order of the current BDP will have receive throughput limited by flow control.
Lost packets can cause gaps in the receive buffer, delaying the application
from consuming data and freeing up flow control window. Timely sending of
```

> +updates to flow control limits can improve performance. However, an excessive
+rate of updates can also adversely affect performance.

```suggestion
updates to flow control limits can improve performance. An excessive
rate of updates sent in their own packet increases network load and
can adversely affect performance.  Bundling updates with ACK
frames provides frequent updates without adding significant load.
```

> @@ -968,6 +968,17 @@ signal before advertising additional credit, since doing so will mean that the
 peer will be blocked for at least an entire round trip, and potentially for
 longer if the peer chooses to not send STREAMS_BLOCKED frames.
 
+## Flow Control Performance
+
+An endpoint that is unable to ensure that a peer has flow control credit on the
+order of the current BDP will have receive throughput limited by flow control
+and not other limiting factors like congestion control.  Timely sending of
+updates to flow control limits can improve performance. However, an excessive
+rate of updates can also adversely affect performance.
+
+This document does not specify techniques for tuning flow control performance

I don't think this paragraph is necessary, but that's me.

-- 
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/3793#pullrequestreview-445637439