Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] kMaxDatagramSize should use the maximum packet size of the connection (#3041)

ianswett <> Tue, 17 September 2019 11:02 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 668D312081D for <>; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 04:02:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.281
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.281 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D7CpIbyFsi5D for <>; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 04:02:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E2D73120810 for <>; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 04:02:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1433996093E for <>; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 04:02:24 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 04:02:24 -0700
From: ianswett <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3041/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] kMaxDatagramSize should use the maximum packet size of the connection (#3041)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5d80bd405b57_5ebf3f922cecd9682807c2"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: ianswett
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: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 11:02:26 -0000

My reading is that this value is the actual max packet size used in the connection, it's just not clear from the explanation.  kInitialWindow and kMinimumWindow are also per-connection fields defined directly below.

There is one potential detail, which is if the MTU increases after the handshake, do the min CWND and Reno behavior change accordingly?  I think it's simpler to reason about them not changing, but I can see both arguments and in the end I don't think it'll matter that much.

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