IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Are random packet number skips still relevant for opportunistic ACK protection? (#1030)

MikkelFJ <notifications@github.com> Fri, 12 January 2018 22:23 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 C1853124BE8 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 14:23:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.382
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.382 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.618, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 CiulDQLPSa3O for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 14:23:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext8.iad.github.net [192.30.252.199]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 419F512426E for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 14:23:31 -0800 (PST)
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 14:23:30 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1515795810; bh=6ZTBPZJOQJJOcZNdg7CfP6yipwTeaexAYxyuQn6AgR8=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=tW1ocaDkmx87AmZALuD39GSgmhZOo45UZ4SZMjq6IuSiUOIfQWpIyivyJ18c4dU7q 3sV9KzDxHIsL+7CgHpTQBi/8oFveOoXxkVvm2FNlza3t1r4sLWfSaVFB2d/b91LsGM KB/q8Xu0/yQeBwxQ/Lx4X+eWcCpIyrg/5hKycg+I=
From: MikkelFJ <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab0273d485091072c59faef85df26a50ac2405988592cf000000011670f76292a169ce10eae4f0@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1030/357371139@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1030@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1030@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Are random packet number skips still relevant for opportunistic ACK protection? (#1030)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5a5935629c926_25ef2ae2374feec8419f1"; 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/m27HLh06T07t4TrHsMgbKRHk9I4>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 22:23:33 -0000

I have two implementations, one using a bitmap and one using some sort of binary search. I'd much rather use the bitmap, but I can't if very second packet can jump 10000 packet numbers just for the heck of it.

-- 
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/issues/1030#issuecomment-357371139

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status