Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] pto_count should be reset when dropping a packet number space (#3272)

ianswett <> Wed, 27 November 2019 05:48 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A21BE1208F1 for <>; Tue, 26 Nov 2019 21:48:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.454
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.454 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, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JjL-pEBbKcwK for <>; Tue, 26 Nov 2019 21:48:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E2721201DB for <>; Tue, 26 Nov 2019 21:48:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8C4B8C054E for <>; Tue, 26 Nov 2019 21:48:05 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1574833685; bh=s6h24RRFgAENKd0uXcXGKrfd3dYlysj2jxyCOkGGPy4=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=kY/iJa4HA76GAVGKydbXaIZ/63pFy9skCXG1W4m1Ax5Zmrgy/xWyr+JdlMp/O53Hb xo/W+wpmA8mU7LolZBcl0DhFAx0k3FQEs/Epbh/+akN7nNJkkxWEBdqo0FlCVb0nqQ nPw5eu0lkRD7Af44V68T15zCE4hLWihPYxRfnltk=
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 21:48:05 -0800
From: ianswett <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3272/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] pto_count should be reset when dropping a packet number space (#3272)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5dde0e1599b06_3aee3fac086cd95c383385"; 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
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 05:48:08 -0000

I believe the simplest way to ensure QUIC isn't overly aggressive during the handshake and to encourage packet coalescing is to specify pto_count on a connection scope, similar to the rtt variables.  I considered making pto_count per-PN space, but that doesn't ensure quite the same exponential backoff properties and I don't believe it's necessary.

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: