Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Fix to ECN section regarding validation (#2113)

Magnus Westerlund <> Wed, 12 December 2018 16:27 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2122B130E8A for <>; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 08:27:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.056
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.056 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-1.46, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 u8A56eeisabJ for <>; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 08:27:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 892AC130E86 for <>; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 08:27:48 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 08:27:47 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1544632067; bh=3HOjWpIDpyP9uXPhcZL0qnr4nT2dKiMtEkliAxv6T/A=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=p5/Bb6wFhCRZnL6she3q5QVloNHE2mRKa8+2On/e7U4KhnZkkMbsaNjDtFhyE+6md xN9YXzRPktiPXTolhih6hX2aWBLg677mE2lJdu7VClVAQzh7CXEPa15Llt169xZuRd 817HXnHuWNrlJiPplbvT48qhJL/c8btizTwf/mqI=
From: Magnus Westerlund <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2113/review/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Fix to ECN section regarding validation (#2113)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c1137038f484_2cb23f7e14cd45c0160180"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: gloinul
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, 12 Dec 2018 16:27:50 -0000

gloinul commented on this pull request.

 * The total increase in ECT(0), ECT(1), and CE counters reported in the ACK
   frame MUST be at least the total number of QUIC packets newly acknowledged in
-  this ACK frame.
+  this ACK frame. This detects if the network changes ECT(0), ECT(1) or CE to
+  Not-ECT.
+If the sender does not have state to determine if a particular packet number is
+newly acknowledged or not, then the comparison SHOULD NOT be performed. By the

Okay, I will rewrite this as non 2119 terms basically stating to not perform the comparison. 

It is a bit like the formulation in RFC 3550: 
"Note that if R is zero, the
      percentage of senders is never greater than S/(S+R), and the
      implementation must avoid division by zero."

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