IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Including ACK delay in packet loss detection time threshold (#3951)

Benjamin Saunders <notifications@github.com> Thu, 23 July 2020 17:25 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 82B713A0B21 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:25:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.009
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.009 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_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, 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 jTl611NCEAN0 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:25:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-20.smtp.github.com (out-20.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.203]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 621163A0BF3 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:25:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-e8b54ca.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-e8b54ca.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.23.39]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 916598C0A58 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:25:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1595525155; bh=HWpBkcEt+5X+AlZsiPiSa14/DcjWfHsl8i0WMvVK+Ds=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=XqgsV6WRevzKAkIsFMhTABS4jKgRn4lO9wC0V4GJyX/Me4cgtXkkqLvQLqxnfFBZI 2fFVkt38anqcWTmSVK+Wlz5us8ms+ynkch77R4pEI+ksG33NudOvjKh2MCVcX0kmW9 +nCFYcczi5rRqqVhuLx6bfpfi3F9rfZeQ9LTbMRE=
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:25:55 -0700
From: Benjamin Saunders <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK5YOBTVSGOSEA4S3WF5EWUSHEVBNHHCPGTYQE@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3951/663132990@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3951@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3951@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Including ACK delay in packet loss detection time threshold (#3951)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5f19c82381521_50783f86b38cd95c1167bb"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: Ralith
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/Mwt6vmlwqW3pISzqW-AAMGwau4Q>
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: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 17:25:58 -0000

While in a typical case the inclusion/omission does seem insignificant, `max_ack_delay` can take values over 16 *seconds*, leading to a quite noticable impact in behavior. If that's nonetheless deemed within reasonable bounds, I think it'd be helpful to have an explicit statement of intent in the text stating that the inclusion of `max_ack_delay` in non-ACK-related timers is for simplicity.

-- 
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/3951#issuecomment-663132990

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email