Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] ACK and PADDING (#1713)

ianswett <> Thu, 30 August 2018 12:26 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 465A7130E6D for <>; Thu, 30 Aug 2018 05:26:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.009
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.009 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qJ401xEi4fir for <>; Thu, 30 Aug 2018 05:26:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D2111130F27 for <>; Thu, 30 Aug 2018 05:26:45 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed;; 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=C7tWozVpyMi99kFUN83MQA7bu7I=; b=cFHgTquhYYbZNoLz OXjlmXySUOYSuYBfZCz/RRxVLzPHBCkUc7JryXkGnjAAcwGndMnoC6C4Yt+SAa3D xDFwXcyECCeiBRJkgzoDDVE4cYJGN34TnfClnGJOsXAeLI0rRQTzXRoe4EuV+jQ6 YrTpV7+Ja3AncHv/RDiNlxyfRCI=
Received: by with SMTP id filter0765p1las1-11626-5B87E282-2B 2018-08-30 12:26:43.077103108 +0000 UTC m=+609177.976832923
Received: from (unknown []) by (SG) with ESMTP id 4NL0r3QtRO-nPmdULJJ7mg for <>; Thu, 30 Aug 2018 12:26:42.913 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD3EB3E024B for <>; Thu, 30 Aug 2018 05:26:42 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2018 12:26:43 +0000
From: ianswett <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1713/review/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] ACK and PADDING (#1713)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5b87e282dbe89_679e3ff80bad45c48812b"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: ianswett
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-SG-EID: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak3zdWWb+BtVcTfDaWAEmLeOG302I4cvvixvrm zGkb7qX78gs7qG23Au9jAZ6Fkjhg7Ue6pBkYTigat4ede1awwBbgvRSAksCNOv0B8zb47VuWZqTpoD Iyi6+Jfn6B3bCNEJ/udyN+fD6tFkSi8PhK47cHdN16kvzr52n3/fYscmibOJ8eRrDJGLZNAh9XqWXb o=
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: Thu, 30 Aug 2018 12:26:57 -0000

ianswett commented on this pull request.

> @@ -3418,14 +3418,15 @@ ACK Block (repeated):
 ### Sending ACK Frames
 Implementations MUST NOT generate packets that only contain ACK frames in
-response to packets which only contain ACK frames. However, they MUST
-acknowledge packets containing only ACK frames when sending ACK frames in
-response to other packets.  Implementations MUST NOT send more than one packet
-containing only an ACK frame per received packet that contains frames other than
-an ACK frame.  Packets containing non-ACK frames MUST be acknowledged
-immediately or when a delayed ack timer expires. The delayed ack timer MUST
-NOT delay an ACK for longer than an RTT, which ensures an ACK frame is sent
-at least once per RTT if new packets needing acknowledgement were received.
+response to packets which only contain ACK and PADDING frames. However, they
+MUST acknowledge packets containing only ACK and PADDING frames when sending
+ACK frames in response to other packets.  Implementations MUST NOT send more
+than one packet containing only an ACK frame per received packet that contains

I think only an ACK is most correct there.  If you really wanted to send ACK and PADDING, that would count towards bytes in flight, and then congestion control is involved, which provides a different rate limit.

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