Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Remove Requirement of an Acknowledgement per Round Trip (#3030)

ianswett <> Fri, 13 September 2019 16:36 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 877B9120041 for <>; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 09:36:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.454
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.454 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_20=1.546, 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
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZszcpNSDjaZB for <>; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 09:36:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F0C112010F for <>; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 09:35:58 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2019 09:35:57 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1568392557; bh=geMrXqhhfdilMZxyfZ38kT9xUFT6Axv9fg1x6CdIyyI=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=I3DLAUh/UFvWTi6HQq/ls54nLb1FUytpyQkvnJ6HfgL2FGqPgP2mmt5twvInCjot+ IEvshbmuhcEgBFclyuVvL0cmFEtOenR0rWvAw2HQmg1X5dzOlT9gUatGEo+RWjGF4S ZUXtGvCuAdPfrz+XsHSnFUEpf6UYaF2bws6vHlu8=
From: ianswett <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3030/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Remove Requirement of an Acknowledgement per Round Trip (#3030)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5d7bc56dd1fe8_37a73fe6ec8cd9683225ac"; 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
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: Fri, 13 Sep 2019 16:36:07 -0000

As I commented on the PR that this came up in, given we have an explicit max_ack_delay that's now communicated, removing the 1 ACK per RTT requirement seems wide.

TCP has no such recommendation and I'm unaware of any indications or proposals that it should have such a property.

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