IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Sender-Controlled Delayed ACK Ratio (#1978)

janaiyengar <notifications@github.com> Thu, 15 November 2018 09:52 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 1AA3412D4ED for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 01:52:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.47
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.47 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.47, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, 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 Z7eGeoMc35Zi for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 01:52:51 -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 0E15C128CF3 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 01:52:50 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 01:52:49 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1542275569; bh=liVwpj7OAijx+18LrpPqCryQ1E+v3Zyp60V49Woclio=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=B+ItYvc4lw0EseB8nMauK+W/QRyxKD9co7F+rWDnEMXumGHCRc0/ApTBN8N2BwPMJ 84vbnK1b+L9YD0bvtHwDGxQtZrh5W19FhyrY3VQOJ3+Ud09/3gwlyyhbYCCuCxAlMu 8bUUFM6T/UEEe/T3bZLJamTZm4Iwrc7Y61LopJAU=
From: janaiyengar <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4abc485106ad4d7f9c4c088288e1e16ce8118c2b2a892cf00000001180503f192a169ce168acaf3@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1978/438982377@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1978@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1978@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Sender-Controlled Delayed ACK Ratio (#1978)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5bed41f1b7167_7c023ff5d84d45b43732ef"; 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/YFJEDzYRznp9j0Sm42Zrk9vXCvA>
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: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 09:52:53 -0000

Going into AckDelay suggestions adds complexity, so I agree that we should not get into it. The NumPacketsBeforeAck parameter however is a fairly straightforward mechanism, and is arguably trivial to implement at a receiver. This is a part of recovery and congestion control that could have used some airtime earlier, but we've punted on it. Fortunately, I don't think it'll be onerous.

As @bbriscoe noted, this allows us to bring the QUIC receiver up to speed with what Linux TCP receivers do, but in a cleaner manner. I had thought that we might address these things within the recovery draft, but doing it with this dynamic mechanism is better.

I'd like to write up a simple proposal here and if the wg thinks it's too much to do, I'm happy to draw back.

-- 
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/1978#issuecomment-438982377

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email