IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] MUST requirement on bursts smaller than IW is too restrictive (#3892)

Lucas Pardue <notifications@github.com> Mon, 13 July 2020 00:42 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 2A3BA3A0BE6 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 17:42:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.501
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=0.7, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 W_ZSjbknM5oP for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 17:42:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-17.smtp.github.com (out-17.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.200]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E169E3A0BDD for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 17:42:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-cf59896.ash1-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-cf59896.ash1-iad.github.net [10.56.112.26]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27D2B6E003C for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 17:42:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1594600959; bh=QrM+Js/Qg7gujvk00Xj6GWdF23/x9SIeOV5NQ9JkAU8=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=DfTYrKQHqIchA1FURpbPWaVVFlJO/bf8Q7l/74udauEFjcLv4hXvmAaRbrTzpgXo2 SeU7vw3tgm4CAobTJuLmW3o7wNBrlvedZQYUH8dQLdisbrunq9jL6u5bFc0yYHZU4X LqZDrx/KBLHaBjx1Y+L+6etR4e0CLT/4s9lEY2+o=
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2020 17:42:39 -0700
From: Lucas Pardue <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK2JU27STKBDBKKIFR55C6HP7EVBNHHCOEJKXU@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3892/657302677@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3892@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3892@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] MUST requirement on bursts smaller than IW is too restrictive (#3892)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5f0badff17823_3be73ff9112cd964402566"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: LPardue
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/XodbxxbO7C3FuhdlQl-B_UXosK0>
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: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 00:42:41 -0000

As an individual, I agree with Jana. We're not going to be able to ship a specification that is able to accommodate all of the spectrum of network characteristics. The documents should allow implementers to build a QUIC implementation that is safe to deploy on the Internet.

As someone less familiar with DCTCP and more general DC considerations, the nuance of making a MUST a SHOULD is likely to be lost on me. A document that takes a more broad look as QUIC in the DC would be super helpful.

-- 
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/issues/3892#issuecomment-657302677

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email