Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Editorial fixes to ECN text (#2189)

janaiyengar <notifications@github.com> Tue, 18 December 2018 22:13 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 12A34129BBF for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 14:13:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.064
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.064 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.065, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 xpp4iWw81-VI for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 14:13:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-5.smtp.github.com (out-5.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7750A126F72 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 14:13:22 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2018 14:13:21 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1545171201; bh=0CZGjDDaKEsWZh+YlV4mt0U9tjlwnvkNrpj5NISZnCM=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=Qin7B1V6Z7xcLWaNSg9KiTy+dO/PIqVqyDKvm4KZxPqk3y60BNc47d4t6Far1+Nyo +gI8Ws1z7gaubfAsZC0eBeEyMf3/eOyP+5XYJ2gjKA8+UTf1gk+REGMi6MKd5c26Zq y8p7v4wB8urtEs33pZXa2S9OOcD3kigFPDS541s4=
From: janaiyengar <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab432c0f5087807ae3c510b2c3b1719b44762c463d92cf000000011831330192a169ce17535656@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2189/review/186307373@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2189@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2189@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Editorial fixes to ECN text (#2189)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c19710188e3f_21a03fb07f4d45bc88498"; 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
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/W0kgloiSGegsbqoAUeBIS_-8LGE>
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: Tue, 18 Dec 2018 22:13:25 -0000

janaiyengar commented on this pull request.



> @@ -3031,33 +3031,28 @@ an ACK frame without ECN feedback, the endpoint stops setting ECT codepoints in
 subsequent IP packets, with the expectation that either the network path or the
 peer no longer supports ECN.
 
-To reduce the risk of non-standard compliant ECN markings affecting the
-operation of an endpoint, an endpoint verifies the counts it receives when it
-receives new acknowledgements:
+Network devices that corrupt or apply non-standard ECN markings might result in
+reduced throughput or other undesirable side-effects.  To reduce this risk, an
+endpoint uses the following steps to verify the counts it receives in an ACK
+frame.  Note that the counts MUST NOT be verified if the ACK frame does not

I'd like to do this in a separate PR. This PR is editorial. While adding a requirement on largest acked shouldn't surprise anyone, it's probably best to make it a separate thing.

-- 
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/2189#discussion_r242725495