Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify ACK of ACKs and bundling a PING (#2794)

[Igor Lubashev <[e-mail]>]

igorlord commented on this pull request.



>  To limit ACK Ranges (see {{ack-ranges}}) to those that have not yet been
 received by the sender, the receiver SHOULD track which ACK frames have been
 acknowledged by its peer. The receiver SHOULD exclude already acknowledged
 packets from future ACK frames whenever these packets would unnecessarily
-contribute to the ACK frame size.
-
-Because ACK frames are not sent in response to ACK-only packets, a receiver that
-is only sending ACK frames will only receive acknowledgements for its packets if
-the sender includes them in packets with non-ACK frames.  A sender SHOULD bundle
-ACK frames with other frames when possible.
+contribute to the ACK frame size.  When the receiver is only sending
+non-ACK-eliciting packets, it can bundle a PING with a fraction of them, such

By the way, the PING has an additional behavior requirement that it is ACKed ASAP, unlike other ACK-eliciting frames.  Bundling a PING forces the other endpoint to be slightly less efficient in its packet sending.  There are other alternatives/hacks like MAX_DATA(repeat latest value) that elicits ACKs but does not imply immediacy (and since it is a repeat, it does not require retransmission on loss, just like PING).

-- 
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/2794#pullrequestreview-256163087