Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] MUST ACK each ack-eliciting packet once (#3092)

Martin Thomson <> Tue, 15 October 2019 23:25 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B8CE12080E for <>; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 16:25:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.596
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.596 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_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 OaFON0DOrSKF for <>; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 16:25:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D8B112003E for <>; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 16:25:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB82E261576 for <>; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 16:25:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1571181949; bh=FLSEmdcrlhUyzUcgGcvCiHh8QEo4b7LJZuhE3uYR9Oo=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=s+S9mdmut5dhunWie+cq8YzjcUh9LgyDHv3+3Kkd81XErglz2YcIVRSgzKttTho9n NVJXgqcwOO+q5bSZm1uy+dhXfKl2wFdbXp0xzwhC5yfXnUT3DnA8T8yrqMSAwDFU87 zQCKsbh9wOuXN2eibbmzhhAtE2coBvij8KyuOUbI=
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 16:25:48 -0700
From: Martin Thomson <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3092/review/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] MUST ACK each ack-eliciting packet once (#3092)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5da6557ca624c_759a3f83484cd9601806e9"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: martinthomson
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: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 23:25:51 -0000

martinthomson requested changes on this pull request.

> @@ -3013,6 +3013,8 @@ guidance offered below seeks to strike this balance.
 An ACK frame SHOULD be generated for at least every second ack-eliciting packet.
 This recommendation is in keeping with standard practice for TCP {{?RFC5681}}.
+Every ack-eliciting packet MUST be acknowledged in at least one transmitted
+ACK frame, and SHOULD typically be acknoweldged in more than one ACK frame.

I think that we want to say that every ack-eliciting packet MUST be acknowledged at least once, and ideally all packets are acknowledged until one of those acknowledgements are also acknowledged.

ACK frame, and SHOULD typically be acknowledged in more than one ACK frame.

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