Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Define how an "out of order" packet is detected (#3347)

Jana Iyengar <> Tue, 21 January 2020 00:40 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9685120832 for <>; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 16:40:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.596
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: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tBGnqQLA3AWx for <>; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 16:40:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 34B1A120831 for <>; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 16:40:01 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2020 16:40:00 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1579567200; bh=+b+v+tcGYwQWKrp7hDCflrSbobJyHWGG4AxCJGIcyFg=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=GltfTix8jQD+c4zstyN2824SNgKM4EjZAxY27ill8wqM4YeQw/x5rk4TRRdGMgm2w PctLhA9h1v9xwL9fmNEzC8Y+lsgLG60YxBnDM5oueQrScmGtpuMV2vecgk+2KI6F7B kJD4yZsur5Y9SjjKF1DQuLQgMeAaBan+OQh7ofEA=
From: Jana Iyengar <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3347/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Define how an "out of order" packet is detected (#3347)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e26486045a00_2b573fb1454cd96c29317f"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: janaiyengar
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
Archived-At: <>
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: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 00:40:04 -0000

Thinking about this some more, there are three possible definitions here for out-of-order:
1. a newly received packet is greater than largest received by more than one,
2. a newly received packet is smaller than the largest received,
3. both (1) and (2).

(1) is the obvious case where a loss happens and a subsequent packet is received. (2) is the reordering case, where an earlier packet is delivered later, and while it does not indicate loss, it does indicate that a gap was filled. It's useful to signal (2) as well immediately to prevent a sender from unnecessarily retransmitting what it believes to be a missing packet.

The definition we want for "out-of-order" is the one that is most useful for determining when to send an immediate ack. The definition in the PR captures both (1) and (2), and is probably the one we want.

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