Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] QUIC's Initial Congestion Window specification is incorrect (#3997)
Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com> Fri, 14 August 2020 02:00 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 47ED43A0BFF for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 19:00:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.009
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.009 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_16=1.092, 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 RbSFfFK5nKDH for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 19:00:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-25.smtp.github.com (out-25.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.208]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F050C3A0BF4 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 19:00:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-5fb2734.va3-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-5fb2734.va3-iad.github.net [10.48.19.27]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FF30840037 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 19:00:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1597370402; bh=VgfjAkpBVFD7lazmxCHiMbBG4gbuUWjQftuHJAeZ8Sk=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=EgSD02I3edmz3bErMkp8nUL1K2QorJiETOVG5CD6FQDDMWO0bmWw/UDASxr8F0RMH uLJaok/UsDQXe9iwR/lWLU6s5RgV5aZ+CE8bT2YNZb2XSQYL+7U+bRssTiyPNePbDx kCKVrPr9X446ZXGHMIGC7TRNB2d0P6DWyqqGekBM=
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 19:00:02 -0700
From: Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK2NYOJMJA36VUW4OGN5IHISDEVBNHHCQ5AU7A@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3997/673841019@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3997@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3997@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] QUIC's Initial Congestion Window specification is incorrect (#3997)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5f35f022877_1e62196419065"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: martinthomson
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/dMtmKjYG0JN2MJ0dwcvCqg76P4k>
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: Fri, 14 Aug 2020 02:00:04 -0000
I think that - as a recommendation - this is fine. Like everything else we recommend in this draft, it is almost certainly not congruent with what implementations will do and that is OK. My suggestion is that those who want to look into this further do so and document their results in a draft that will be pursued independent of QUIC. At some point we have to say no to further refinement and that point has passed. -- 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/3997#issuecomment-673841019
- [quicwg/base-drafts] QUIC's Initial Congestion Wi… ianswett
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] QUIC's Initial Congestio… ianswett
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] QUIC's Initial Congestio… Martin Thomson
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] QUIC's Initial Congestio… Gorry Fairhurst
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] QUIC's Initial Congestio… mirjak
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] QUIC's Initial Congestio… ianswett
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] QUIC's Initial Congestio… Gorry Fairhurst
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] QUIC's Initial Congestio… Jana Iyengar