Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify which packet losses may be ignored (#3450)

MikkelFJ <notifications@github.com> Mon, 24 February 2020 21:37 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 B9FF03A13B4 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Feb 2020 13:37:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.1 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, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 iHzLrzgjQjRK for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Feb 2020 13:37:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-11.smtp.github.com (out-11.smtp.github.com [192.30.254.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B0143A13C2 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Feb 2020 13:37:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from github-lowworker-2ef7ba1.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-2ef7ba1.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.16.66]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC3C62616DA for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Feb 2020 13:37:45 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1582580265; bh=NUTRnv3c8eiIglvM8urCTlGMzQxXEc5rBr1Uurzmi3k=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=FlMntKtCRrV6tbmsRBiOjPwtlKUkUxokPMeJW604T5MuimVbq2HoyTjzbUh25/tqb wbYoFue4TLbhrvIlE9QfEoCjFcMn0QX6wWK7Ds3UXcfnNpNQLL8B746KUVY+LrxZ3w CklZzbu2YHA3ImOG61FCwfCRzQdL2nTcbI7sFLyk=
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 13:37:45 -0800
From: MikkelFJ <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK3AHKB6ETGY6G6TDR54MF2KTEVBNHHCDFAESA@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3450/review/363719124@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3450@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3450@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify which packet losses may be ignored (#3450)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e54422976569_17663fcfb00cd964314d1"; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: mikkelfj
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/hxhJSsgxil9LOxJT0-YjAcIfR3c>
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: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 21:37:48 -0000

mikkelfj commented on this pull request.



> @@ -690,12 +690,14 @@ losses or increases in the ECN-CE counter.
 
 ## Ignoring Loss of Undecryptable Packets	
 
-During the handshake, some packet protection keys might not be	
-available when a packet arrives. In particular, Handshake and 0-RTT packets	
-cannot be processed until the Initial packets arrive, and 1-RTT packets	
-cannot be processed until the handshake completes.  Endpoints MAY	
-ignore the loss of Handshake, 0-RTT, and 1-RTT packets that might arrive before	
-the peer has packet protection keys to process those packets.	
+During the handshake, some packet protection keys might not be available when
+a packet arrives and the receiver can choose to drop the packet. In particular,
+Handshake and 0-RTT packets cannot be processed until the Initial packets
+arrive and 1-RTT packets cannot be processed until the handshake completes.
+Endpoints MAY ignore the loss of Handshake, 0-RTT, and 1-RTT packets that might
+have arrived before the peer has packet protection keys to process those
+packets. Endpoints MUST NOT ignore the loss of packets that were sent after
+the earliest acknowledged packet in a given packet number space.
 

If you send a packet you consume bytes in flight. If you do not get an ack for that packet, eventually it is lost. I'm not sure what it means to ignore in that context unless you complete ignore an earlier packet space. But perhaps the text refers to ignoring received packets, not sent packets. In that case I would say drop, not ignore.

-- 
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/3450#discussion_r383529337