Return-Path: 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 817213A0E0C for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 05:30:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.697 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.697 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_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, 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 LhN1-IZ-XkJC for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 05:30:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out-24.smtp.github.com (out-24.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.207]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D60693A0DFF for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 05:30:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from github-lowworker-3a0df0f.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-3a0df0f.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.25.92]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C51A6A004B for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 05:30:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1590582625; bh=hk+5EZh38vZMfUFLDH3EAVHhRmaBMwB+W+I5LRxjpt4=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=oidJei0DlJm4jsB7cliJDXBo7OtdW4WLi3fKfOjijtJB7Zw2y3o+dWdFsiOFVduWa Sni5oLgB+iCu3pJjIiMeBy6qrMMXrtr172Rwyi4Ahiw4qIu4zuXc++YD5nupEDcZiM /+d42sFV84x1234PRmyQDMDXIsZf5uSTteqW7tjY= Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 05:30:25 -0700 From: mirjak Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts To: quicwg/base-drafts Cc: Subscribed Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Text on ECN probing (#3585) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5ece5d61df84_6d593f9b50ecd9683095ca"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: mirjak X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org Archived-At: X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 12:30:28 -0000 ----==_mimepart_5ece5d61df84_6d593f9b50ecd9683095ca Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit #3669 does not address this issue. This was just a side comment that came up. I think the minimum would be to replace "To reduce the chances of misinterpreting congestive loss as packets dropped by a faulty network element..." by "If there is as a concern for a certain network that all ECT-marked packets might be dropped by a faulty network element and would therefore cause a performance drop, then..." However, I would still prefer to give a bit more context than this (basically one more sentence as proposed). I don't think this fits in the applicability statement as I don't think there is any intention here to provide an interface to specify the ECN probing behaviour and therefore a "user" of QUIC, which is the audience for the applicability statement, would not know what to do about this information. If we want an interface and move this to applicability, I think the whole text should be moved there with some more discussion rather than giving a random recommendation in the base spec. -- 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-634627412 ----==_mimepart_5ece5d61df84_6d593f9b50ecd9683095ca Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

#3669 does not address this issue. This was just a side comment that came up. I think the minimum would be to replace

"To reduce the chances of misinterpreting congestive loss as packets dropped by a
faulty network element..."

by

"If there is as a concern for a certain network that all ECT-marked packets might be dropped by a faulty network element and would therefore cause a performance drop, then..."

However, I would still prefer to give a bit more context than this (basically one more sentence as proposed). I don't think this fits in the applicability statement as I don't think there is any intention here to provide an interface to specify the ECN probing behaviour and therefore a "user" of QUIC, which is the audience for the applicability statement, would not know what to do about this information. If we want an interface and move this to applicability, I think the whole text should be moved there with some more discussion rather than giving a random recommendation in the base spec.

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

----==_mimepart_5ece5d61df84_6d593f9b50ecd9683095ca--