Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Only send one immediate ACK after reordering (#3357)

ianswett <> Sun, 09 February 2020 14:36 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7F4C12004A for <>; Sun, 9 Feb 2020 06:36:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.682
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.682 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_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7kYH4Xsd7E_D for <>; Sun, 9 Feb 2020 06:36:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 236B312003E for <>; Sun, 9 Feb 2020 06:36:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56B2E8C0F9F for <>; Sun, 9 Feb 2020 06:36:23 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1581258983; bh=YbWJzltv5dlh6j1dJQA6wMFGV9rmZiR/JcyfjRmFIhs=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=o99bXm+Nrn19NoU7/zp77xcpjTYMtRWkF7ZTfvxXrLClURob9VNobffgWQQHcwiZz DdI6i8y7gR6VMaxS6+qwOt+sniU1joR77mjT1z4GwIR6X3RRCAWBjnm8QKLQbCP/+8 9q2rwdRDkLW78tqBaeM1NasF2BmokNgGBqMQ3m3k=
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2020 06:36:23 -0800
From: ianswett <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3357/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Only send one immediate ACK after reordering (#3357)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e4018e748073_ccd3f9f052cd95c84029"; 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
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2020 14:36:26 -0000

@gorryfair You appear to be saying that if we substantially changed the current ACK guidance, this might be suboptimal.  Is that correct?

I don't believe the current guidance is optimal in almost any circumstance, so I would really like to change it.  Also, I don't believe we'll end up changing the ACK behavior substantially in the core drafts at this point, so I believe we should proceed with guidance we think works well with the existing draft without being substantially sub-optimal if a receiver does unilaterally decide to ACK less frequently.

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: