IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Add a section on flow control performance (#3793)

evolodina <notifications@github.com> Fri, 26 June 2020 11:19 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 E7D783A1128 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 04:19:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.483
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.483 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_24=1.618, 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 G2QNmmt7Z_lq for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 04:19:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-21.smtp.github.com (out-21.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.204]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9AD0E3A1094 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 04:19:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-d31a065.va3-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-d31a065.va3-iad.github.net [10.48.17.70]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D71CAA1DBE for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 04:19:45 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1593170385; bh=Tc5emprhENaSy7adx6qPq3q58OG42Uu34V+74kM+yMM=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=KdaM5nlSNZcZS/uN362zXSARBSpQyTIknBHEMf1693ESs7i+W5qPDTFqhk0B5ztk7 Hf5ju+deqL+OLyfYeJqb7gxbIJ8GbPK6rUcM4ej4uRV4Pwk0wf8Y2OZDiWtMOxCfm4 oXmIhJ4jw8E2i7u0XfBzR3ehhSTxXchHoHnhuug4=
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 04:19:45 -0700
From: evolodina <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK6P2R2EEFTF7N6ZK7N5AG5NDEVBNHHCNAR3C4@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3793/review/438214877@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3793@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3793@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Add a section on flow control performance (#3793)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5ef5d9d1c8704_29da3f7fdf0cd96c6698"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: evolodina
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/UJNhsQyIBMAqpr0-cZJmx-v2hBo>
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, 26 Jun 2020 11:19:48 -0000

@evolodina commented on this pull request.



> @@ -968,6 +968,24 @@ signal before advertising additional credit, since doing so will mean that the
 peer will be blocked for at least an entire round trip, and potentially for
 longer if the peer chooses to not send STREAMS_BLOCKED frames.
 
+## Flow Control Performance
+
+Unlike TCP, QUIC decouples flow control from congestion control. This can

> TCP doesn't couple CC and FC either? The receive window is independent of cwnd. (There are some autotuning implementations that couple them, but the spec doesn't.)

Exactly right, TCP does not copule them. I know RFC 813.
I wonder if there is another RFC, where the TCP FC is described. 

-- 
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/3793#discussion_r446123448

v2.26.15 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status