IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Don't store or retransmit PATH_RESPONSE frames, avoid buffering (#2729)

Rui Paulo <notifications@github.com> Tue, 28 May 2019 23:57 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 9EE801200D8 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 May 2019 16:57:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.605
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.605 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] 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 uWCVoKiNuqMX for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 May 2019 16:57:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-3.smtp.github.com (out-3.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E8CE120074 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 May 2019 16:57:38 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 16:57:37 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1559087857; bh=AocQXu+ejUZM/if31sWeTnu4B1Yxg+VG/S+Uc2+34QI=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=KrXKh8PZfYNTylRqIc3loEeVxqNhkwJki1r69pKAektb/pcgE1yJVCvyxEgwjEDRM TSDkcdR/i23gfW6rUSYnAJUsu0oc9l4mpsIO5iywlmAvfOlJVZMBnR0deY/m9NUmIf YxJfpUakzeE1SUPwjaXDm4T1yacdo+vaEoCwJk5M=
From: Rui Paulo <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK4TSEYVPNSNJOVJU3F27L6XDEVBNHHBVGEZF4@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2729/review/242976595@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2729@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2729@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Don't store or retransmit PATH_RESPONSE frames, avoid buffering (#2729)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5cedcaf1245a6_34fb3f9e01ccd95c153213"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: rpaulo
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/WipmqhXDUf4eZxtw_DnPGXuKeVw>
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, 28 May 2019 23:57:41 -0000

rpaulo commented on this pull request.



> @@ -1721,7 +1721,12 @@ it can associate the peer's response with the corresponding PATH_CHALLENGE.
 ## Path Validation Responses
 
 On receiving a PATH_CHALLENGE frame, an endpoint MUST respond immediately by
-echoing the data contained in the PATH_CHALLENGE frame in a PATH_RESPONSE frame.
+echoing the data contained in the PATH_CHALLENGE frame in a PATH_RESPONSE frame,
+unless it has PATH_RESPONSE frames buffered for the same destination connection
+ID and wishes to limit memory consumtion, for example when congestion limited.

This example is inconsistent with the advice of just using one congestion controller so we might want to skip it.

-- 
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/2729#pullrequestreview-242976595

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email