Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify why PTOs in idle timeout period (#4091)
ianswett <notifications@github.com> Fri, 11 September 2020 13:53 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 9CFCF3A099C for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 06:53:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.555
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.555 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_20=1.546, 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 585oRRpZ1O2W for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 06:53:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-17.smtp.github.com (out-17.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.200]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F13293A0A74 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 06:53:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-39b4a70.va3-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-39b4a70.va3-iad.github.net [10.48.16.66]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3E3A5C0EAB for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 06:53:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1599832434; bh=OvKG47cJ8hL+uiin/3gu4vuHaYPNKU1GW9twQ2z+pHM=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=IUISvj2m3a4ttGw8GJ5MJi+YoqWBsBjnBHJZRo/VZwHnKMk4lrY7gtW1dnGKBicw6 FrEfie1opFfeIjsIRrMqNASqohfoteBYMZBUFr6q/XwlAyJgizO1fVygN9jkcWM+rh tMftkYqXx20yMgXqa2+pNtPT4rlnXei/SKK9AAac=
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2020 06:53:54 -0700
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJKY3SKVPC4LF7RLUMHN5M5RHFEVBNHHCTJSUWI@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/4091/review/486826529@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/4091@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/4091@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify why PTOs in idle timeout period (#4091)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5f5b8172c50fa_439719f080756"; 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
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/SEc1GckC6l0Hmx6DYj6HMPJoStg>
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: Fri, 11 Sep 2020 13:53:58 -0000
@ianswett commented on this pull request. > @@ -2707,8 +2707,8 @@ ensures that connections are not closed after new activity is initiated. To avoid excessively small idle timeout periods, endpoints MUST increase the idle timeout period to be at least three times the current Probe Timeout (PTO). -This allows for multiple PTOs to expire prior to idle timeout, ensuring the idle -timeout does not expire as a result of a single packet loss. +This allows for multiple PTOs to expire, and therefore multiple probes to be +sent in the event of loss, prior to idle timeout. Probes aren't sent due to a loss, so I think this is also confusing. -- 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/pull/4091#pullrequestreview-486826529
- [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify why PTOs in idle tim… Jana Iyengar
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify why PTOs in idle… Martin Thomson
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify why PTOs in idle… ianswett