IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] What the maximum of TransportParameters.max_ack_delay? (#2282)

Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com> Wed, 02 January 2019 21:30 UTC

Return-Path: <bounces+848413-a050-quic-issues=ietf.org@sgmail.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 7DF01129AB8 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Jan 2019 13:30:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.568
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.568 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.065, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_OBFUSCATE_10_20=0.093, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no 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 UOW4DczXwoGL for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Jan 2019 13:30:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from o8.sgmail.github.com (o8.sgmail.github.com [167.89.101.199]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C39611274D0 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Jan 2019 13:30:51 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; h=from:reply-to:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:list-id:list-archive:list-post:list-unsubscribe; s=s20150108; bh=rbzDtWcabsosj5ooP3R9u7qLOhQ=; b=IWvjE3edaOv09ywC 8wI8ZyW2RBvXGFdfqkU/NyMXw+PKYKpBZ/i8GFg5KJzzqJMuaSHk4QmZ9IT8x6Zo UcQlBhknNh6le7TPz4aV4XgLRveTi7Bc4AbQKmWIeZZt3rjp1HoKLj4ReUsPDvzq P6lPrTf61AUD45imcHwq8eVsStA=
Received: by filter1853p1mdw1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter1853p1mdw1-10182-5C2D2D89-F 2019-01-02 21:30:49.206223217 +0000 UTC m=+1394952.728824856
Received: from github-lowworker-0b1e58d.cp1-iad.github.net (unknown [192.30.252.43]) by ismtpd0024p1iad2.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id LbpHJJGoQsy0B9ad2SOftg for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 02 Jan 2019 21:30:49.169 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from github.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by github-lowworker-0b1e58d.cp1-iad.github.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23D4C3E133B for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Jan 2019 13:30:49 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2019 21:30:49 +0000
From: Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4abe9a14ec55e3a7185becbadeb5b6d0fec9efc73ee92cf000000011844ef8992a169ce178cf63b@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2282/450991267@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2282@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2282@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] What the maximum of TransportParameters.max_ack_delay? (#2282)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c2d2d89222ac_59ca3fec290d45bc1620212"; 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
X-SG-EID: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak0AhQA0+A/rdUmE+I2IXIII2eXrFIbx5dRGrF mBm4qtW+jGCWGzszJMXyDwqAWNr6Ch9nCdyxTTxPNZ2OSmiFZUW+81ITva9ZBxSLQiN9FsVAvjsI2o FrkRsLSxHbb2opwqGfAPoVRXvOSzn8qLI5HwJvm8gJ27OiTJoxPhCQzDgSI6GmzvSEHWnOiPESv4CC I=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/Ftzb3wr18vOKlLdhwP4v5idgxsQ>
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: Wed, 02 Jan 2019 21:30:53 -0000

> How big? 2^16-1, 2^32-1, 2^64-1, 2^30-1? I'd have said that 2^14-1 would be more than enough here. 16 seconds is a long time to hold an ACK.

2<sup>32</sup>-1 would be a bit too big for 32-bit timers. OTOH I do not think anybody will be using a 16-bit millisecond-precision timer and therefore 2<sup>14</sup>-1 or  2<sup>16</sup>-1 sounds fine.

-- 
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/2282#issuecomment-450991267

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status