Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Only send one immediate ACK (#3361)

Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com> Sat, 18 January 2020 13:35 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 34176120020 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 18 Jan 2020 05:35:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.596
X-Spam-Level:
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: 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 xL3E81QkJZbw for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 18 Jan 2020 05:35:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-19.smtp.github.com (out-19.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.202]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBA9912001B for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Sat, 18 Jan 2020 05:35:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from github-lowworker-39b4a70.va3-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-39b4a70.va3-iad.github.net [10.48.16.66]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CBD6521111 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Sat, 18 Jan 2020 05:35:21 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1579354521; bh=jNTDVMw65fdop5mgHRw9IgM1Tl2bKK8JBSx4M1/yw70=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=yBS0sYJ91YQ0e6lhsBN2tYitcHIWa7ploXN1XoKBFFqkUVxT4j7Ymfbwt3szsqScM 2O0i9fAsbUVmf+ziS32YCoRL7HXAy8hUhdurFe4GNUZx76BH3A5B/Qoo5sId2L9rev l/y0sETgkwzoZU8crPqPI3RL4uUG9tlzWrugx9is=
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2020 05:35:20 -0800
From: Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJKZAEETSB7IES5LD7MV4GA6BREVBNHHCBYLBH4@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3361/review/344943800@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3361@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3361@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Only send one immediate ACK (#3361)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e230998f0a1c_8843fb51d0cd96c5105f8"; 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/Go_J-jhSyRdlINxeyo2mcBA_40M>
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: Sat, 18 Jan 2020 13:35:23 -0000

kazuho commented on this pull request.

LGTM modulo one nitpick.

> @@ -3136,12 +3136,10 @@ This recommendation is in keeping with standard practice for TCP {{?RFC5681}}.
 
 In order to assist loss detection at the sender, an endpoint SHOULD send an ACK
 frame immediately on receiving an ack-eliciting packet that is out of order. The
-endpoint MAY continue sending ACK frames immediately on each subsequently
-received packet, but the endpoint SHOULD return to acknowledging every other
-packet within a period of 1/8 x RTT, unless more ack-eliciting packets are
-received out of order.  If every subsequent ack-eliciting packet arrives out of
-order, then an ACK frame SHOULD be sent immediately for every received
-ack-eliciting packet.
+endpoint SHOULD not continue sending ACK frames immediately unless more

not -> NOT

-- 
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/3361#pullrequestreview-344943800