[quicwg/base-drafts] df5825: Proposed change: MUST mark inflight data as lost
janaiyengar <jri.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 20 December 2018 01:25 UTC
Return-Path: <bounce+565321.40f-quic-issues=ietf.org@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 0A44412D4E7 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 17:25:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.996
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.996 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 TKBncLmChE8q for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 17:25:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from m71-131.mailgun.net (m71-131.mailgun.net [166.78.71.131]) (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 9723B12D4E6 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 17:25:04 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; v=1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; q=dns/txt; s=mailo; t=1545269103; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type: Mime-Version: Subject: Message-ID: To: Reply-To: From: Date: Sender; bh=fwVzRaHr7jApFMw7GARhXYvb8ovx2ywDjjrUptNyH3w=; b=XKG0Xm1TkKHeHymelz9lnSYPlsZt8aNRFzTvgCHftfuuu2X4AWFaFK6UH9LnlrKU0z8KukmC UjV0HvKx0XEt2IlU+wg8kDQ1t0kii3NXBeq3wQbjVaTsRM87OBDOvX2l78NtAHcSC7Gu2kTY zo8Fp2Zbjm+s9JgXCG6FWFlNvTU=
X-Mailgun-Sending-Ip: 166.78.71.131
X-Mailgun-Sid: WyJhNzYyYiIsICJxdWljLWlzc3Vlc0BpZXRmLm9yZyIsICI0MGYiXQ==
Sender: jri.ietf=gmail.com@github.com
Received: from github.com (Unknown [192.30.252.39]) by mxa.mailgun.org with ESMTP id 5c1aef6f.7f01d340cdb0-smtp-out-n03; Thu, 20 Dec 2018 01:25:03 -0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 17:25:03 -0800
From: janaiyengar <jri.ietf@gmail.com>
Reply-To: janaiyengar <jri.ietf@gmail.com>
To: quic-issues@ietf.org
Message-ID: <5c1aef6f5acb9_4bc12b1ab53a05842572b@hookshot-fe-31feec6.cp1-iad.github.net.mail>
Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] df5825: Proposed change: MUST mark inflight data as lost
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c1aef6f5a666_4bc12b1ab53a058425656"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/S0r1gJaK0ikd7SAhzxP9aL7JraE>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
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, 20 Dec 2018 01:25:06 -0000
Branch: refs/heads/janaiyengar-patch-2 Home: https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts Commit: df582552db8b1f791861367046ff6e50d66c4bc4 https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/commit/df582552db8b1f791861367046ff6e50d66c4bc4 Author: janaiyengar <jri.ietf@gmail.com> Date: 2018-12-19 (Wed, 19 Dec 2018) Changed paths: M draft-ietf-quic-recovery.md Log Message: ----------- Proposed change: MUST mark inflight data as lost A proposal: I think I prefer to mark things as lost instead of suggesting that a sender SHOULD send something when there's really nothing to be sent. I was starting to rephrase your PR to say "SHOULD send ack-eliciting packet, but MAY mark as lost", and I needed to explain how a sender makes this choice. I realized that if it's been long enough (PTO is long enough) and there's nothing left to send, then maybe it is sensible to mark anything pending as lost. So, I changed my suggestion to that, which is this PR (against your PR). **NOTE:** This service has been marked for deprecation: https://developer.github.com/changes/2018-04-25-github-services-deprecation/ Functionality will be removed from GitHub.com on January 31st, 2019.