IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Text on ECN probing (#3585)

Jana Iyengar <notifications@github.com> Fri, 29 May 2020 22:58 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 542703A1148 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 May 2020 15:58:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.544
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.544 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_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_TEMPERROR=0.01] 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 CVLW-hibbfxV for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 May 2020 15:58:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-6.smtp.github.com (out-6.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.197]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC3E53A1146 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 May 2020 15:58:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-943b171.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-943b171.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.22.59]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F8CD1C099B for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 May 2020 15:58:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1590793105; bh=o0dsqb20IRSq+EiMph+VUNI3o5Kkcgk9nheM8UmLh3g=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=GL89CkjNcMCCQkq+4Ec7xmYXvdgv0N7yJiSwU2nhcjV7bYQfHs25xIB46c4sEJKvo 6370mjZWcDuxAPKLuBe1HWPG1/XF5gQXjtwojSDYA6YrKeFa0qxIcGyytS4tSn57l3 ZE5cD0YH7pCHL5NFS6kx97w00fJD2A8ihkUizHwE=
Date: Fri, 29 May 2020 15:58:25 -0700
From: Jana Iyengar <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK62DLG2LPKIBPCFUUF43V2JDEVBNHHCHVTIIM@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3585/636227803@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3585@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3585@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Text on ECN probing (#3585)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5ed193914d0cd_4e103fe58bacd964121879"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: janaiyengar
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/F7s6qWrPtHmC7HSEC_SpCrb0oVc>
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: Fri, 29 May 2020 22:58:31 -0000

Implementing this mechanism is trivial for someone implementing the rest of QUIC. It's not a lazy implementer that is causing the problem of lack of implementation, it's an unmotivated one. As @larseggert notes, in the absence of ACK-ECN, this doesn't even matter.

I am not hearing any of the implementers complaining about the complexity of the mechanism here, so I would argue that the mechanism is not an issue.

-- 
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/issues/3585#issuecomment-636227803

v2.29.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status