Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Send after receiving an ACK (#3047)

Jana Iyengar <> Wed, 18 September 2019 02:29 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81C6B1201A3 for <>; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 19:29:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.454
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.454 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, 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
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HlswDc0w-8iz for <>; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 19:29:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9CCBD120096 for <>; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 19:29:30 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 19:29:29 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1568773769; bh=ykYcJ5UkLRLcz4PCF96uOXc721kVcWX3gfEMGuNN+rc=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=v1kdah2nksflxT7cFJkdG3XwNmxiEgzImbWSeb10XzGU5C8BWP7aBRL0ctC+Tyr/H HCJz8V+PiDrj/ntj8Pbu6NZB6yJ5gPGt/aRCGX3TcY83gpKz3Q8IHaDQ+mCQQGbeCV uH1SqHYMji8Ox9/kR6YQO8U6D9+A5Pdqr5knXWzQ=
From: Jana Iyengar <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3047/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Send after receiving an ACK (#3047)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5d819689c7f8a_6be33f95efccd96c469977"; 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
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: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 02:29:33 -0000

So, yes to pacing, but there are impls that won't do pacing. Even with pacing, there's now an additional delay in recovering from this packet loss -- loss recovery time is increased by pacing_delay (which will be higher now that the loss has occurred). Allowing the sender to send out 1 packet immediately minimizes the chances of loss repair delay at the receiver.

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