IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] ACK generation recommendation (#3304)

Yang Chi <notifications@github.com> Wed, 18 December 2019 17:50 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 F2F18120969 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Dec 2019 09:50:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.382
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.382 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_HI=-5, 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 bpfCQrlKacc2 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Dec 2019 09:50:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-22.smtp.github.com (out-22.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.205]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0C206120241 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Dec 2019 09:50:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from github-lowworker-a6a2749.va3-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-a6a2749.va3-iad.github.net [10.48.16.62]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08949A0921 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Dec 2019 09:50:23 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1576691423; bh=8oKp3CUZ4lZdohIc11xbbDXAiMcUOnf/SJ5HPcBneuM=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=mxYuikB1uedPcU7+Gtn7b74ubakDfc3On3y1s5Z+FHbVy18yYNpKjguMh++O0eBLP NlMBAxHQcWAyCQhScTc3916PUjnv0KlTbcLosOGtHD0ZJ0jP0oF6nwPTlBLB7M2qd5 MacORPYpxK9Dzdfic0qE1xHIP42uXOYuWNL112kc=
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2019 09:50:22 -0800
From: Yang Chi <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJKZWZPWU4NTLECJER4N4A6MV5EVBNHHCAHNJCY@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3304/567139775@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3304@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3304@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] ACK generation recommendation (#3304)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5dfa66deee64a_3a303f9c79ccd968211769"; 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
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/OBhvSbGId0udzhLiYB8JekALFEg>
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, 18 Dec 2019 17:50:26 -0000

> Chrome is likely to be speaking to servers that might be using Cubic or Reno in the near future. Do you recall how serious the degradation with Chrome's ACKing scheme was? With 1/8th RTT?

Shouldn't that largely depend on server implementation? Server implements ack handling poorly vs Server implements it OK will have very different throughput for the same ack frequency from the same peer, assuming everything else equal.

And that's why using a specific recommendation in the draft is tricky. This is a receiver behavior, but it's the sender that knows what's the best way to do it.

-- 
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/3304#issuecomment-567139775

v2.30.2 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status