Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PTO after handshake completion is not well-defined (#3831)
ianswett <notifications@github.com> Sun, 26 July 2020 18:51 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 44AC83A1451 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 11:51:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.483
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.483 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, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.618, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, 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 SgB9R0dV5aEU for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 11:51:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-22.smtp.github.com (out-22.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.205]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C6DDB3A13F4 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 11:51:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-2e54e43.va3-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-2e54e43.va3-iad.github.net [10.48.17.27]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C935A5607E2 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 11:51:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1595789471; bh=xGP+WFe+UHjG0iQmG1xg35UUm+Hpz5HlSHnGDTXqTc0=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=QDIQkkziPGELCJZ6tD5wGoOncDc/oauWHFOHiHjIg9bIdG9qfqU+hJ7eEfn7MRSxe 3fGhGSFZI8BzdTQF+vylOwgTFr/4VG1vnh+NZ2KMeHszUCYBaZKhDTyA0qc4BEw8AF x9w8ZXetJsDJ4bIz+UOHomyjemqfaehs8HOyvt0Q=
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2020 11:51:11 -0700
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK7GFMYLLNGF2K6BQ5N5FGYZ7EVBNHHCNXO66A@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3831/664026240@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3831@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3831@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PTO after handshake completion is not well-defined (#3831)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5f1dd09fb7248_39d3fd0448cd96816730f8"; 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/c8Gpytjl14Et26RJ1qHUU-WDgzY>
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: Sun, 26 Jul 2020 18:51:25 -0000
As commented elsewhere, persistent congestion is a feature of the congestion controller, so it's across all PN spaces. I also agree with @kazuho that the current text indicates setting the alarm to outstanding_0.5RTT_packet_sent_time + PTO. Only in the case of no in-flight packets is Now(in this case handshake_completion_time) used. I actually think the existing text doesn't imply you'd start from then handshake completion time, but I can write an editorial PR to make it completely clear. > A sender recomputes and may need to reset its PTO timer every time an ack-eliciting packet is sent or acknowledged, when the handshake is confirmed, or when Initial or Handshake keys are discarded. -- 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/3831#issuecomment-664026240
- [quicwg/base-drafts] PTO after handshake completi… Marten Seemann
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PTO after handshake comp… Kazuho Oku
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PTO after handshake comp… Martin Thomson
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PTO after handshake comp… Marten Seemann
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PTO after handshake comp… Kazuho Oku
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PTO after handshake comp… Kazuho Oku
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PTO after handshake comp… Kazuho Oku
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PTO after handshake comp… ianswett
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PTO after handshake comp… Jana Iyengar