IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PMTUD (#64)

martinduke <notifications@github.com> Tue, 13 December 2016 01:05 UTC

Return-Path: <bounces+848413-a050-quic-issues=ietf.org@sgmail.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 9C3EB129FEB for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Dec 2016 17:05:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.279
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.279 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.618, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.896, 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 5Nd-D1ElU1lw for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Dec 2016 17:05:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from o8.sgmail.github.com (o8.sgmail.github.com [167.89.101.199]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E4D1E129FE6 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Dec 2016 17:05:30 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=github.com; h=from:reply-to:to:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:list-id:list-archive:list-post:list-unsubscribe; s=s20150108; bh=bL4P0ZL0zktLutt38jsaoKExRa8=; b=kJ2XMULx1iRLo8Uo MJeLR0Inj8T1wjil08nzlQbQsZp/lZkH1MiLrgJeJKeK25TlDHUiEf9sB9KCXr85 eJLxy3quY47kJMrCXfZQ54XzQjFjBZtqt+oZoqmjNiRXQ1evc/LnhoSkgZS88801 Qnzn24IsYACgYTr+pWewOxBUdtI=
Received: by filter0433p1mdw1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter0433p1mdw1-8016-584F494E-22 2016-12-13 01:05:18.400326185 +0000 UTC
Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net [192.30.253.16]) by ismtpd0006p1iad1.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id Kv1Bf2r4QZaSjvBuPVwGow for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 01:05:18.295 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 17:05:18 -0800
From: martinduke <notifications@github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/64/266604073@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/64@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/64@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PMTUD (#64)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_584f494e32117_10063fe5c0d19134210530"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: martinduke
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-SG-EID: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak25IKMRfGb0sz+5UBQtQQTKIXDrQNdYqOmxO9 zN7gUPO/LcKPWt24PSBG7se4LzhBhoYsrmIaEjZjLC1dS4hLTGE0wvjowzL0RjOFQWyvnXdBF9tGHn dGyZSAjUurE1rynKnyV4g6/MAlcGUb3CHeqWj92QGTCcZkTRoI7OrQSkSCAfC/IZvbjE8Zvd9LbPWs o=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/_kU6MkiTd6KKDeXRvRPUVwqdeHE>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab77d837d4ec15f2b4ab9afa0024f99830583fc9f092cf0000000114670b4e92a169ce0b80e2d9@reply.github.com>
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, 13 Dec 2016 01:05:32 -0000

I should also add that the very first packet is a poor one to use to wait for loss, as the RTT is entirely unknown and must use a conservative RTO value. It might be better to use a relatively conservative value, as the draft does, at first, and probe upwards to see if there's more capacity to unlock.

-- 
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/64#issuecomment-266604073

v2.34.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status