Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] GAP limitation in ACK Frame (#613)

ianswett <notifications@github.com> Tue, 27 June 2017 14:46 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 99EE5129B50 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 07:46:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.396
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.396 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 0iK73kcCV4c6 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 07:46:00 -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 B8449129B49 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 07:46:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; h=from:reply-to:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:list-id:list-archive:list-post:list-unsubscribe; s=s20150108; bh=YFDjMLZg8jzP6DszC/X0hdqn4l0=; b=gDYGVY1rj/LYity7 EuOhMmcvg8TTUnCEw066gYLBH4l3oH+wwsZHVLVGG5I/bfAEvUy6vlSkXG/uTDEV hDJHdjnaZpmmpikhbsstLH6Dw2QpGyIYRbZgfuhbqBnICNmVTfXalTmXW+AOzrlz XB3WwEcsD3ss9jD+RovHTChLoKU=
Received: by filter0985p1mdw1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter0985p1mdw1-3593-59526FA7-83 2017-06-27 14:45:59.613738332 +0000 UTC
Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net [192.30.253.16]) by ismtpd0004p1iad1.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id oyztujZ7QM6VSSpsMhxcsQ for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 14:45:59.591 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 07:45:59 -0700
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4abc539071e43e39236e6bfc75ae4d7fce4078afc9392cf00000001156a31a792a169ce0df979f2@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/613/311381263@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/613@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/613@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] GAP limitation in ACK Frame (#613)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_59526fa744df6_71a93fdbeaeefc2c134241"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: ianswett
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: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak1NLLQghKmagqxI4k7UPqQnTRd6p1fM2ZARUR pJkLBq0rz0Kz127c1FgQRWOdIOaJF6IsQ9PUvXiaDu0SLvFdz58Eso9NZqAggSk7hipnJFMbFV8Cpq ztyTP+AIE22Zh640Q6jdvw44CE49KF0DGSScOaoyehDjTtfJyJVndY80VfnFCpAFkzrzVhPKJUxbBI 0=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/O_CWPZjrb_Qo5wl97kuwE0bwwgQ>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 14:46:03 -0000

Timestamps are only sent once, so assuming there isn't a large amount of reordering or loss, up the the 255th most recent is more than sufficient.

But yes, if you're commonly experiencing loss and reordering >255 packets, you won't get timestamps.  But that is extraordinarily rare in my experience, and since timestamps are best effort, one should use them as an enhancement to congestion control, not the sole input.

-- 
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/613#issuecomment-311381263