Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Remember UDP size limit for 0-RTT (#3498)

Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com> Wed, 04 March 2020 10:42 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 67F963A0C07 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Mar 2020 02:42:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.482
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.482 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_24=1.618, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, 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 0OnY2EZFrhC0 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Mar 2020 02:42:06 -0800 (PST)
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 EF1413A0C03 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Mar 2020 02:42:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from github-lowworker-d31a065.va3-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-d31a065.va3-iad.github.net [10.48.17.70]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8C7D6A0090 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Mar 2020 02:42:04 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1583318524; bh=zdryFAfzqx9rTtB9z4CV2Pf+hw69GG3QuOH4FEPC5u0=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=J2N69risLSzR3f5oPtUFIENu/Y2ng68RaPtyRFY/xYbMwTDuYUQ7V1r8cDhtDR2+q K9Y6iZIF7TNVWsWHLWWzruj7Z1HHETVcHvzPaTtBQDnnqCZb26o6nFWoAtO4wBnh7d WXQSnNA5NjDa2lkBD0a+Kw3EIg2ZSuDLtS3x8hxM=
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2020 02:42:04 -0800
From: Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK74VVFPIKYFFCYWGNV4NNTPZEVBNHHCER4U6A@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3498/review/368672175@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3498@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3498@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Remember UDP size limit for 0-RTT (#3498)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e5f85fcc865d_5d723f8e1a2cd96c212322"; 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/JY8BVE8uferwZg_J268FOxrAjK8>
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, 04 Mar 2020 10:42:08 -0000

kazuho commented on this pull request.



>  
 * initial_max_data
 * initial_max_stream_data_bidi_local
 * initial_max_stream_data_bidi_remote
 * initial_max_stream_data_uni
 * initial_max_streams_bidi
 * initial_max_streams_uni
+* max_udp_payload_size

Well, the counter argument would be that by sending datagrams larger than 1,280 bytes, the client is already risking packet drops caused by the network. I would assume that that risk is far bigger than packet drops caused by the server reducing the size of its packet receive buffer.

-- 
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/3498#discussion_r387583924