Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Notify the congestion controller of losses first (#3540)

ianswett <notifications@github.com> Tue, 31 March 2020 16:21 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 E96E13A23CD for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 09:21:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 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, 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 T5t6KqCewB1t for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 09:21:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-25.smtp.github.com (out-25.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.208]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B5153A23CC for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 09:21:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-d1d6e31.ash1-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-d1d6e31.ash1-iad.github.net [10.56.105.50]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE04A2829B6 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 09:21:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1585671665; bh=GBJ1ZWga24QC8dBBIn282LTXiOJ6mlsYIgNhiomBMyw=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=XT0mtBP8l5d7+8YufoHGHdnLDENMBrhfZ99zAjp8Qy4LDofUo6Glja4DMOV4BNV7h zwJjI/PKHERZ4b/5nrO6DSI/wi5hFV7deMrLYIUCPc1F08ZGSBC12ARVwtTsNCyCpe iFwtPwnVZGUTdQgRQ4axGP8K1dVP/ETZmxDJ5P4w=
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 09:21:05 -0700
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK3NQRYP7QL2VGPPJXF4R5HPDEVBNHHCF2VMJI@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3540/c606730634@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3540@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3540@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Notify the congestion controller of losses first (#3540)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e836df1adc5b_7ec93f8ac06cd95c1280d9"; 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
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/_BbYMqVA3FiGQKNBPZ8xDvUqXVg>
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: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 16:21:08 -0000

@marten-seemann my reasoning was I thought it was critical to determine what packets were newly acked before invoking loss detection.  In some cases it may be(depending upon details of one's loss detection), but since we update largest_acked_packet[pn_space] outside the code which detects newly acked packets, it's not critical to the pseudocode as it stands today.

That being said, I think the parallelism is nice, so I'd prefer to keep it.

-- 
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/pull/3540#issuecomment-606730634