Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Should QUIC provides PING interface for upper layer? (#3567)

Mike Bishop <> Thu, 09 April 2020 14:07 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD4453A067A for <>; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 07:07:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.175
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.175 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.168, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, 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 0bAxZvTNRASA for <>; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 07:07:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 53C4C3A011D for <>; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 07:07:25 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2020 07:07:24 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1586441244; bh=nCuj3xfjZWmnjrUTJm2ziWkPtWMEdNWIMiHRDBu+PWo=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=CjRVr0FeGm18V81KOn82N3YEs9TiwcHyw37rCmHaxnm8p06B4nBWdDlUCCK/N1ctT CJEcNLb6ejOrSNm7XxK7XKLiUCDUlB+AItu+xgokYVX/+SAhp/U9YXOf1Di3VxZvlo moEkIASrlgxxhJR0fyXfZWPZBZrcpIS2SHTjz5W0=
From: Mike Bishop <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3567/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Should QUIC provides PING interface for upper layer? (#3567)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e8f2c1c26f03_49983f9cc7ecd9682542d1"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: MikeBishop
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: Thu, 09 Apr 2020 14:07:33 -0000

A QUIC implementation can provide a feature to trigger a PING frame and optionally check the time until it gets ACK'd.  I don't think that's something the specification needs to require, because it's not required for interoperability, but it's certainly a capability that market pressure might drive an implementation to expose.

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