IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Explicit support for on-path calculation of loss and congestion of QUIC flows (#632)

ianswett <notifications@github.com> Mon, 19 June 2017 13:56 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 02870129BE0 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Jun 2017 06:56:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.799
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.799 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_32=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 oFHrPCzxBa8n for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Jun 2017 06:56:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from o3.sgmail.github.com (o3.sgmail.github.com [192.254.112.98]) (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 BC12113149B for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Jun 2017 06:56:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; h=from:reply-to:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:list-id:list-archive:list-post:list-unsubscribe; s=s20150108; bh=3Po7vxZXtq44f7NrdEEUfmbAfqw=; b=pSP+yIy6jjTS1h35 bD1XWeW6t4/Eqdi45lDq0mTB2MyTwsSPSm6S17yBK8JCQC8CyxfoR1la7cKHMU3j 2byGh+rQF8hnwSl0xCf1lFCMLExJgqtqfYLI99aynsGucNS6D/VTWmNdQOVXOx/v zXCbosgz4h2dPixRQFeulIl5U2U=
Received: by filter1185p1mdw1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter1185p1mdw1-14122-5947D7F5-7F 2017-06-19 13:56:05.589960703 +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 ismtpd0004p1iad1.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id q5x9FSJlTWWr-xQ7SIt6iQ for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Jun 2017 13:56:05.589 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 06:56:05 -0700
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4abc5be846466472c77e22e982fa3cbb59aebea5df692cf00000001155f99f592a169ce0e0f95f5@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/632/309447071@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/632@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/632@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Explicit support for on-path calculation of loss and congestion of QUIC flows (#632)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5947d7f56c629_3ce13fdf0f3ebc2c10523a"; 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
X-SG-EID: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak1RkbpF/YlDLF+IljyTxUM12NsPYokiuNLXnO YXe+LA3wu2jnFmLsdBQeFIJvLPkxQd/WfkWhJJQSCQx3q+XYC/h5khpbAAT+Cz0zV1COgfkPygLjJM 1sGfUaxcVxbB01FS9Pyymzz35LE00ecmUbg1B2vSI0vWTLAGBRhNI65k3NDLbO9uphYevykNZmWxUp w=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/dj7FVcLsE8iaefjqeYFWUEXk9gA>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 13:56:09 -0000

I believe a single bit for loss would be extremely low fidelity, because losses are commonly correlated, so it may actually be more misinformation than information.

I've seen one case when this would have been nice to have, but I think there are other ways to monitor loss that are more useful(ie: I'm seeing a lot of loss at this peering point, etc).

Brian, I believe you mentioned writing up a proposal for an extended 'debug' header that would not be default enabled, but be available for detailed network debugging.  If we were to adopt that, I think loss would be helpful there.

-- 
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/632#issuecomment-309447071

v2.39.1 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status