IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] ACK generation recommendation (#3304)

Christian Huitema <notifications@github.com> Mon, 23 December 2019 01:58 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 30522120048 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 17:58:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.382
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.382 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_24=1.618, 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 Oyml8jJsm1Vt for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 17:58:21 -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 BB1B3120026 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 17:58:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from github-lowworker-2ef7ba1.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-2ef7ba1.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.16.66]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29F8C9605FC for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 17:58:21 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1577066301; bh=QnmgclznGZWko3sNe1JOOjWicDQzv2ja95RdSEBf7Qo=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=gZzU8cg46IEy477T88HoB0sdZF/fLuby9zAlmsoBlW1LrlVhd2spAxgREKBJDTcPP 0cUXZJI1aHH0e6iGxnxpfWvb1SWhuwuPf4fxr3LwBalG8LfVk7ePC5j7DuT34stLbG TXwvQ6x7KRtHVIIoujOUExtsRZSnE9S1+EimYwxs=
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2019 17:58:21 -0800
From: Christian Huitema <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK26NODNV6JJ5OAUDHN4BVI33EVBNHHCAHNJCY@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3304/568327833@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3304@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3304@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] ACK generation recommendation (#3304)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e001f3d1a799_43c13f84f2ecd96415948b"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: huitema
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/GkkIBmSsR7D-Igs7Av30ecwCKiY>
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: Mon, 23 Dec 2019 01:58:24 -0000

The reason with not going above `ack_gap=4` in the normal case is similar to what @ianswett mentioned: the gap 10 does cause regression in some of the test scenarios. The funky test on last active stream is also there to avoid some regression, because the sender is typically trying to resend the non-acked packets, so acking sooner results in better performance overall. The test on 128 packets is because of slow start, large ack intervals there do cause regressions. 

-- 
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/3304#issuecomment-568327833

v2.30.2 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status