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

Gorry Fairhurst <> Sun, 15 December 2019 07:12 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EDCC120071 for <>; Sat, 14 Dec 2019 23:12:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.596
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.596 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_28=1.404, 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 xwjY4UxogqgK for <>; Sat, 14 Dec 2019 23:12:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 893CC120005 for <>; Sat, 14 Dec 2019 23:12:07 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2019 23:12:06 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1576393926; bh=17cy9tkDGkfPTz8sBCEfzVbAB6sTEGt2dUIQhrsjoJw=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=zz1CHP4szfMzR/pSB6O84ye6w0HW7AFHpU913mdQ0ss3OED1fFY3INu35+CJZvP8O ytve0hAeBp2QYKtJkj5lM663gS3Xn/yskOYCjdEchxViVzSZK2HoZ9e2hpw8CEvwHX VXOGiKLdOQDuPGqKdl94h+T52DFsbzhncw5HmyyE=
From: Gorry Fairhurst <>
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_5df5dcc69b1cf_29363f974b8cd9685830f9"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: gorryfair
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: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 07:12:09 -0000

gorryfair 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 think this cross-reference is needed - people implementing flow control need to ensure this part is correctly implemented also.

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