[quicwg/base-drafts] is persistent congestion per pn_spance? (#2649)

Yang Chi <notifications@github.com> Wed, 24 April 2019 13:25 UTC

Return-Path: <bounces+848413-a050-quic-issues=ietf.org@sgmail.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 6EC991200A3 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 06:25:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.383
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.383 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_24=1.618, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no 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 4E9R5mURXPAw for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 06:25:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from o8.sgmail.github.com (o8.sgmail.github.com [167.89.101.199]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D51F120043 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 06:25:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; h=from:reply-to:to:cc:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:list-id:list-archive:list-post:list-unsubscribe; s=s20150108; bh=agNRNcnyHnsaf3SEesskr+DRK+I=; b=AVByDyqo0fLjOEg7 p94EFOnPYmrX0uI9QV9q1l9SKmjwWAOdAExRiQHFbICNkHqPlAgGdmOyJOx7ukgX eKeibkS0zJAwCXWqC57drB5dEZsm+9TeCXStF2m4IlgziCq4K7YRkCjE4QtRVCfi 6NHN0G3kh17BYJhOPDftvN3SOkU=
Received: by filter1021p1las1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter1021p1las1-13706-5CC063AC-3F 2019-04-24 13:25:00.726019065 +0000 UTC m=+150564.220615394
Received: from github-lowworker-cef7735.cp1-iad.github.net (unknown [140.82.115.3]) by ismtpd0050p1iad1.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id R1PMeu91SWCZzn23rU9m3Q for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 13:25:00.584 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from github.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by github-lowworker-cef7735.cp1-iad.github.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83F9C1E072A for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 06:25:00 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 13:25:01 +0000 (UTC)
From: Yang Chi <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK5UTDACASOYDNP5VXN2ZWLCZEVBNHHBUB3SPE@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2649@github.com>
Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] is persistent congestion per pn_spance? (#2649)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5cc063ac8249a_73503fdb30acd96015018e"; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: yangchi
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-SG-EID: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak1lBfO4j7SkqgQpx/M2WiIXI3H4eZ6oAABSLj zBTyBCKkJTFm8JnlZYEVsRCkNWCrnL6b5q0L5eP2YePxjffHTQ+aDvwzc8gIUevW+JP4EAKLyx0+o9 0LZ0kUnuh2NkOnyXKcijefZCeWm8yyo+jFqP5X0XEH6o9Hp3nHdnEL2mTMs/S0kTnIX0yyJ19YjRVT U=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/NLIuVFA-FWZ7p9FgwlNHPTRjMoo>
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, 24 Apr 2019 13:25:03 -0000

The wording around persistent congestion sounds across pn_spaces:

> When an ACK frame is received that establishes loss of all in-flight packets sent over a long enough period of time, the network is considered to be experiencing persistent congestion.

But DetectLostPackets function is per pn_space and persistent congestion checking is invoked from there. So if DetectLostPackets find all packets of one pn_space within a persistent congestion window are lost but packets from other pn_space within this time window are not lost, is this persistent congestion?

-- 
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/2649