Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Don't recommend 3 RTTs of credit (and other editorial) (#3301)

Jana Iyengar <> Tue, 17 December 2019 05:02 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4C63120098 for <>; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 21:02:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.382
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.382 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, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.618, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 aU_JEcCpdeKK for <>; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 21:02:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E4473120059 for <>; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 21:02:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B6252C1349 for <>; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 21:02:08 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1576558928; bh=q6Gu12Dk9w+YnJkvmLVD8sOs98ZvYTL0cnSkep+FQss=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=avz7h/cQuOGmPZMxrN5i+o0l2bIGOtcY8/ywR8pKx/r3XKVnAAEknwBaCqvU7kZar T08CVKhQyHyV9CM2De6KdGpbRaEbmJLsZ+clprnCCRap0U+5dMtAcBt5bO2wb9MsHy pJL3XqF+h6P/cl+1QN0h4CqZrl0LGJWJFOHNhIFg=
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 21:02:08 -0800
From: Jana Iyengar <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3301/review/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Don't recommend 3 RTTs of credit (and other editorial) (#3301)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5df861503866d_40f43fc109acd96019384b"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: janaiyengar
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: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 05:02:11 -0000

janaiyengar commented on this pull request.

> @@ -833,11 +833,6 @@ implementations.  As an optimization, an endpoint could send frames related to
 flow control only when there are other frames to send or when a peer is blocked,
 ensuring that flow control does not cause extra packets to be sent.
-When a sender receives credit after being blocked, it might send a large amount
-of data in response. As is recommended in {{QUIC-RECOVERY}}, implementations
-should pace this data to avoid sending it in a burst and causing short-term

I've added a reference in but with better text I think.

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