Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Limit CWND increase in slow start (#3232)

[Jana Iyengar <[e-mail]>]

janaiyengar commented on this pull request.

Now that it's all put together, I think Ian's is a fair question. I'd also like to take the working group's sense on whether we should have this change in the pseudo code. Having it in the text makes sense to me -- that's just parity with TCP for non-paced QUIC flows.

That said, the pseudo code is in the Appendix for a reason -- it's perfectly reasonable to add things there or leave things out as we see fit. The code is an example of how things might be done. 

> @@ -775,7 +775,10 @@ Implementations MUST either use pacing or limit such bursts to the initial
 congestion window, which is recommended to be the minimum of
 10 * max_datagram_size and max(2* max_datagram_size, 14720)), where
 max_datagram_size is the current maximum size of a datagram for the connection,
-not including UDP or IP overhead.
+not including UDP or IP overhead. Implementations not using a pacer SHOULD

```suggestion
not including UDP or IP overhead. An implementation that does not use pacing SHOULD
```

-- 
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/pull/3232#pullrequestreview-318739432