Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] QUIC flow control is not quite like HTTP/2 (#3766)

Lucas Pardue <notifications@github.com> Tue, 16 June 2020 22:22 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 56A273A086A for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 15:22:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 3.303
X-Spam-Level: ***
X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.303 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, GB_SUMOF=5, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no 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 T8J3c8jnFk_R for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 15:22:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-20.smtp.github.com (out-20.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.203]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0E2B23A0879 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 15:22:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-52827f8.ash1-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-52827f8.ash1-iad.github.net [10.56.108.24]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54CF78C0B55 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 15:22:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1592346137; bh=tIQvDWSH9e39+nkwL51wFFpSnQ3e00WzPiR7ObPzrpk=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=wRhTXcl9oey1ZUmCz97abgfa7W71MogLzjzMmcCFxO7wy9PKsELrO2hTcJ/Gr5HFs r8APdrx2mj04spZnAo7lrDwlEgqyLxM1IIX3rsieIgGokQ0b/lNBIYWV/zZyKGBgfw y3OuRgc5qkF0ofLg/EuezaGPClP3yoM7agTnlYxM=
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 15:22:17 -0700
From: Lucas Pardue <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJKYCRECQ4KCAY5HQLZN46UTRTEVBNHHCMF53IY@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3766/review/431933174@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3766@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3766@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] QUIC flow control is not quite like HTTP/2 (#3766)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5ee9461945d8b_218b3f99840cd96c1501ec"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: LPardue
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/d5ZfOHDUZU4amE91_bcT0Wcm_is>
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, 16 Jun 2020 22:22:19 -0000

@LPardue commented on this pull request.



> +A receiver can advertise a larger limit for a stream by sending a MAX_STREAM_DATA
+frame with the Stream ID field set appropriately.  A MAX_STREAM_DATA frame
+indicates the maximum absolute byte offset of a stream.  A receiver could use the
+current offset of data consumed to determine the flow control offset to be
+advertised. A receiver MAY send MAX_STREAM_DATA frames in multiple packets in
+order to make sure that the sender receives an update before running out of
+flow control, even if one of the packets is lost.
+
+A receiver can advertise a larger limit for a connection by sending a MAX_DATA
+frame, which indicates the maximum of the sum of the absolute byte offsets of
+all streams.  A receiver maintains a cumulative sum of bytes received on all
+streams, which is used to check for flow control violations. A receiver might
+use a sum of bytes consumed on all streams to determine the maximum data limit
+to be advertised.
+
+Once a receiver advertises an offset for the connection or a stream, it MAY

```suggestion
Once a receiver advertises a limit for the connection or a stream, it MAY
```

limit seems more consistent now

-- 
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/3766#pullrequestreview-431933174