Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] CONNECTION_CLOSE is non-ack-eliciting (#3098)

Marten Seemann <> Wed, 16 October 2019 16:42 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88FC21207FD for <>; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 09:42:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.999
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.999 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_32=0.001, 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 qL2xWXjRPo9S for <>; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 09:41:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E623E120170 for <>; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 09:41:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39F39520E59 for <>; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 09:41:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1571244118; bh=2uTjqLcxyZv4R2F32wtA/DW3RzA8NQAm6Iditx6GYME=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=i7ysPuNvvLUw16PEscKRKmegZy22XsEhq0VFnBD5MRP9h3RyUMMAHsX0J3Bn764EY /CebkCO5bvXKRsZgQLqv4vVfDOXpfaZk2Kza56tlbAuSiNALIJAh1wdsSZXB6JjMwF 6DuBtzGVCLxwIqQKfp+RQ/AfXKkvhJtJtNKeqb1o=
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 09:41:58 -0700
From: Marten Seemann <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3098/review/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] CONNECTION_CLOSE is non-ack-eliciting (#3098)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5da748562b2b0_17fa3ff8b7ecd96c598c2"; 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
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: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 16:42:00 -0000

marten-seemann commented on this pull request.

> @@ -167,8 +168,8 @@ of frames contained in a packet affect recovery and congestion control logic:
   performance of the QUIC handshake and use shorter timers for
-* Packets that contain only ACK frames do not count toward congestion control
-  limits and are not considered in-flight.
+* Packets that contain only ACK or CONNECTION_CLOSE frames do not count toward

It's not clear if the "only" applies only to ACKs or to both.

> @@ -192,8 +192,9 @@ QUIC packet:
 Ack-eliciting Packet:
-: A QUIC packet that contains frames other than ACK and PADDING. These cause a
-  recipient to send an acknowledgment (see {{sending-acknowledgements}}).
+: A QUIC packet that contains frames other than ACK, PADDING, and
+  CONNECTION_CLOSE. These cause a recipient to send an acknowledgment (see

If you bundle a CONNECTION_CLOSE with other frames, it's still not ack ack-eliciting, is it?

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