IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] are flow control frames really idempotent? (#1612)

Marten Seemann <notifications@github.com> Tue, 31 July 2018 04:16 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 9A487130DF0 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Jul 2018 21:16:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.01
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] 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 uLcX1CV7NpWV for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Jul 2018 21:16:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-6.smtp.github.com (out-6.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.197]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 31B3F130DE0 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Jul 2018 21:16:26 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2018 21:16:25 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1533010585; bh=/xTLag9FSl5Mz15PzGDC9Kl/qQdvqRuLGdqHv1QQySs=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=lIVzV+vg6PssHNyNdhM9GDDoZSv141opoSE0G+iBbaneo/CKG6tBluDq6M7ORj555 Qncu4+7gGbudztwAxAKDhSQ5nNAMh2GT/aemOnXT2pH7M6kbtbNeZdbaMpiZQ6zvwL hN0NhwLCvxV08RSrnamgor/i4uvmH1+dutR1DBL4=
From: Marten Seemann <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab2efb5c33ef77e98eab88a09457cf97d0141309e292cf000000011777a49992a169ce149fd7cc@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1612/409089185@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1612@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1612@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] are flow control frames really idempotent? (#1612)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5b5fe299382a4_32973ffae3ad45bc683222"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: marten-seemann
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/hf5gMvD5u-XaMM2E-YaFlJ__O50>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: Tue, 31 Jul 2018 04:16:28 -0000

I didn't say it's impossible, but it would add a lot of code for saving a tiny number of bytes, occasionally.
I don't think we should force implementations to perform an optimisation when the performance benefits are probably barely measurable at all.

-- 
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/1612#issuecomment-409089185

v2.31.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status