Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Recovery: when PTO expires and no data to send (#3286)

Junho Choi <> Fri, 06 December 2019 00:58 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20DCB12021C for <>; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 16:58:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.382
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.382 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_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
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FjZMxVhYe1MX for <>; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 16:58:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A90BE120046 for <>; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 16:58:10 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2019 16:58:09 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1575593889; bh=QkJRvlO0D7p42Eqaaxfp9XhMgumNC0lOjMguKUa/eo4=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=BPwQU7BcQcXLTQOyvZ/HmRTvn55sGjZEO7E7HVEE1O7kclodIm5c4L4L0820oNjeK QrV1Hkq35/GLjIHj89ASuLpI8ENQ/JPZNP19jxw97WcPF2tX9FfhpU2gv46pTn/RH2 OttHlCcZV2ir+5B07V/RrytgPxZGGUSrWx0hExO0=
From: Junho Choi <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3286/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Recovery: when PTO expires and no data to send (#3286)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5de9a7a1a0411_113e3f8daa6cd96012599c"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: junhochoi
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: Fri, 06 Dec 2019 00:58:12 -0000

> This exponential backoff of PING packets is less wasteful than a TCP RTO

Do you mean TCP PTO, not RTO?

> In order to detect persistent congestion correctly, you'll likely need to send multiple PINGs in this case.

I agree the use case of persistent congestion, but if we detect persistent congestion (collapsing cwnd) by consecutive PINGs, is it over-reacting to cwnd because there is no real data sent?

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