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

Kazuho Oku <> Fri, 14 June 2019 06:32 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 640CF1200EF for <>; Thu, 13 Jun 2019 23:32:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.391
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.391 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_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, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] 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 R-UOva_rS12D for <>; Thu, 13 Jun 2019 23:32:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F9D61200E6 for <>; Thu, 13 Jun 2019 23:32:20 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 23:32:18 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1560493938; bh=jjAHPFTsOu/darutSqjPmgnQBqfgdbg6mf7fh0aYG+c=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=ti5zC1ziMbhOKD5rqVjG8uI835zBn8LHjvvFUvgzGwHR6orJMwvR/43YVFqrkCrWf m+R3V4k4Www04LZMisMHhSkg/sqPYiRmhfta1/pr40D5anIYJnHyS2sODS/GDlJAwa rfnohKNtH1R4t4QzZM/uhDBZt7AUYdpvv7TTGISM=
From: Kazuho Oku <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2729/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
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_5d033f72a20b0_1e313f84ed8cd960205955"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: kazuho
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: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 06:32:22 -0000

> With this text, should't PATH_RESPONSE be non-ack-eliciting?

I think there is no need for such change, because a frame that's ack-eliciting does not necessary mean that it needs to be retransmitted. 

Quoting section 13.2 of the transport draft, _QUIC packets that are determined to be lost are not retransmitted whole. The same applies to the frames that are contained within lost packets. Instead, the information that might be carried in frames is sent again in new frames as needed._

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