Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] ACK generation recommendation (#3304)

Gorry Fairhurst <notifications@github.com> Wed, 29 January 2020 17:07 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 2489C120884 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 09:07:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.381
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.381 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_24=1.618, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=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 FSxNCSkbiEEu for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 09:07:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-2.smtp.github.com (out-2.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32789120869 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 09:07:30 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2020 09:07:29 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1580317649; bh=LVwhnvY3z5oZHuq67cZuPknh8x/6Mdh9KZdh5Pz3Ggk=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=GGiCZDJCA7nyDXtAkcGFkFeSB9MDHnZS9ceJoFsSnNZfZiUUvLCPF266cJrc0EVqM lSz+YDwmtdpPGuRTQPmqLI33tlj4vWtRLsnwwQL/Yn4UKDCzsWxoC2I6pI+PVevzE/ kTUcIJuTjI+x3MYqmvvnG2vdAbl6oV5Nlh6MpLtA=
From: Gorry Fairhurst <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJKZPQOK75YK2HB6EFUN4H3XFBEVBNHHCAHNJCY@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3304/579859660@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3304@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3304@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] ACK generation recommendation (#3304)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e31bbd11338_680c3f87730cd96c13062e"; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: gorryfair
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/g2ELdKPh5GyMwAfdegVi83IgII4>
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: Wed, 29 Jan 2020 17:07:33 -0000

To me the problem is in two parts ... The first part is "what is the default?" - I still think we shouldn't be designing a QUIC default with significantly worse performance than TCP - simply because TCP can take advantage of an in-network device to Thin ACKs - we should think carefully about setting an appropriate default. To avoid a long "issue" we wrote a draft on this and can present results if there is interest, with a proposal to change the default in the spec:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fairhurst-quic-ack-scaling/

draft-iyengar-quic-delayed-ack provides opportunities to tune the ACK policy for a server and CC algorithm.  I don't see the two drafts in competition. Both could proceed?

-- 
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/3304#issuecomment-579859660