Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Don't recommend 3 RTTs of credit (and other editorial) (#3301)

Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com> Tue, 17 December 2019 06:26 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 BAE9E1200CD for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 22:26:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.999 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_32=0.001, 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: 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 BPbN1OlUdDnR for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 22:26:05 -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 4A57B1200CC for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 22:26:05 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 22:26:04 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1576563964; bh=RClbYj6Hn1ls5uXtpyOemg0s/Y6vxdQ2fD3TvCdVRKc=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=16aQ3H+ytp/wAl2S9swvLGgogoLz5OkDgXYX7XZFz68umDdDpi7RkOQSEkQEAK0FY clNgUreNYES3RV7vZ787J0tYXOWH1JIUNsVrMPzLnHy4DTkoNvP0TFc1rKgGW4CdGX 1qs5OynOjoeJN+24WUGo052FO86uptNY2jV9XoDE=
From: Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJKZ7ICRLS2C5YKXWG4V4AWTXZEVBNHHCADX3MM@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3301/review/333054360@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3301@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3301@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Don't recommend 3 RTTs of credit (and other editorial) (#3301)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5df874fc4975b_76273fe1a4ecd9641438b5"; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: kazuho
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/E81xR8TXPZhGTAQgonwPV0C33PM>
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: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 06:26:07 -0000

kazuho commented on this pull request.

LGTM modulo the point below.

> @@ -801,33 +801,41 @@ limit is increased.
 
 ## Flow Credit Increments {#fc-credit}
 
-This document leaves when and how many bytes to advertise in a MAX_STREAM_DATA
-or MAX_DATA frame to implementations, but offers a few considerations.  These
-frames contribute to connection overhead.  Therefore frequently sending frames
-with small changes is undesirable.  At the same time, larger increments to
-limits are necessary to avoid blocking if updates are less frequent, requiring
-larger resource commitments at the receiver.  Thus there is a trade-off between
-resource commitment and overhead when determining how large a limit is
-advertised.
+Implementations decide when and how many bytes to advertise in MAX_STREAM_DATA
+and MAX_DATA frames. This section describes one requirement and offers a few
+considerations.
+
+A receiver MUST NOT wait for a STREAM_DATA_BLOCKED or DATA_BLOCKED frame before

I understand that we are moving existing text, but "MUST NOT" seems a bit odd to me, as it could be interpreted as a prohibition against the receiver intentionally blocking the stream. Maybe "SHOULD NOT" is better.

-- 
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/3301#pullrequestreview-333054360