Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify ACK sending text in transport (#3480)

Igor Lubashev <> Sun, 01 March 2020 16:44 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2E933A0783 for <>; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 08:44:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.482
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.482 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, 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 K69Kg36BuHJe for <>; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 08:44:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4690E3A08E2 for <>; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 08:44:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DD442C0A51 for <>; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 08:44:56 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1583081096; bh=LhJ2EvvgoWZbB8Lm9EE+TmHHYq14nqorlwVTReQacZQ=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=hHGdKkCtiQpLNG/uqga0wan8egBNha53k42nIiemBOpyWhYR8OACc/BdMDAnKEVpx Vmck8XIt3BW2clBQx2UWLZNa1Dx6JhGkRnwJSRR6XnY8bgI7OAYt4whtDvmcysnVh6 F3CVPeU6nMQT9rTJQNvJy9g3WwlXgTChumi6eXbU=
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2020 08:44:55 -0800
From: Igor Lubashev <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3480/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify ACK sending text in transport (#3480)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e5be687efe2b_47cc3fb58d8cd96c369631"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: igorlord
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: Sun, 01 Mar 2020 16:44:59 -0000

> a sender cannot rely on receiving an acknowledgement of every packet, whether it's ack-eliciting or not, because ACKs get lost.

I do not understand this statement. Yes, packets with ACKs can get lost. But the mechanics of QUIC is that until an ACK-of-the-ACK is received, the sender will continue to acknowledge all packet ranges from the original ACK in every subsequent ACK. So if at least some ACK gets through, everything will get ACKed, despite of some losses of ACKs.

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