Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] pto_count should be reset when dropping a packet number space (#3272)

Jana Iyengar <> Thu, 05 December 2019 03:14 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id F32AC12018B for <>; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 19:14:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.382
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.382 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_HI=-5, 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 PnYEQnFMZOkr for <>; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 19:14:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 50654120077 for <>; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 19:14:19 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2019 19:14:18 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1575515658; bh=3CxxEbfBlIKRJmNd+0AMe/IJ5/dEcUIdWx5Qx2l93U4=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=x4GvQNeTM7FIGnzwZ4Z31gzCTaD02JyQFozfdKMYTIrEgCxsXM3RjNnIf7MaGjEIi su2arqCKoXT5rVips3HvTfr1VkTx2PMf0jleuWISLJ4wr2x3GzAzfxAfmODWe6RjSM usozfTGPaoIABLOFIKepOAbq1XeRdCXK99JTnD5U=
From: Jana Iyengar <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3272/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] pto_count should be reset when dropping a packet number space (#3272)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5de8760a52630_30193ff784ccd95c172580"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: janaiyengar
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: Thu, 05 Dec 2019 03:14:21 -0000

@kazuho : In theory, if we use the max of counts when setting the timer, it is possible for a single pto_count to increase without increasing the max. Which means that the sender can effectively seem to not back off sometimes, causing it to be potentially more aggressive than after the handshake.

I might have been a bit harsh earlier -- I think this is fine.

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