Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Idle timeout interaction with RTO (#1429)

[janaiyengar <[e-mail]>]

@ianswett: It seems like that second part (time of last sent packet after a packet was received) captures the RTO cases, so that you don't keep restarting this timer if the sender keeps RTOing with no ACKs being received. 

@martinthomson: I think this works ok in your example right? The client receives an ACK which causes it to count the next packet, whenever it is sent, as a new start of the idle timeout period.

That said, idle timeout should not be used when the endpoint is RTOing into the void. That is a failure, and ought to be captured by a different constant, since it's about how long we're willing to keep trying before giving up on the connection, and will be f(RTO). Idle timeout does not have anything to do with the RTO period.

-- 
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/1429#issuecomment-396428459