IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] No RTT samples, no persistent congestion (#3889)

Marten Seemann <notifications@github.com> Wed, 22 July 2020 03:04 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 8E1173A09FC for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:04:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.555
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.555 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_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, 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 wI2tKAS-rCGU for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:04:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-24.smtp.github.com (out-24.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.207]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 476DF3A09FB for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:04:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-f045d1f.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-f045d1f.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.19.54]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1EA46A0553 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:04:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1595387054; bh=EhGPcBSWgPx5Nfbx9X1tH303yJL3XTxM176GSzgB0ZE=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=iaBTxkEptDVjR1JH0GFTH5GBmx85uY/quOgXf5aIsMnGs20sEwlX8v4b326LRH7Aa qvlJ1jziYLSC4wYG3zgDUsWcJWc+WMWt/hgplxWZ9iLQaHprnAKA45GiwLZUFnXjN1 IGueRH2snxkZb0AJlKi5myJKXdZCV1zdaG5UXUVU=
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:04:14 -0700
From: Marten Seemann <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJKYXMDCFLVRUU3CRWJF5EOG25EVBNHHCOAK6ZQ@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3889/review/452962766@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3889@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3889@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] No RTT samples, no persistent congestion (#3889)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5f17acaeb26e6_44023fb7d9ecd96815337f"; 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
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/mIRuhvcbFSe4BIs4X9ZWNJMa4oY>
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: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 03:04:18 -0000

@marten-seemann commented on this pull request.



> @@ -1581,6 +1588,10 @@ Invoked when DetectAndRemoveLostPackets deems packets lost.
 
 ~~~
    InPersistentCongestion(lost_packets):

The comment now says:
> Determine if all packets in the time period before the largest newly lost packet, including the edges and across all packet number spaces, are marked lost.

My point is that this is unnecessarily complicated, as only packets within a single packet number space, namely the packet number space the ACK was received in, can be newly lost.

-- 
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/3889#discussion_r458506049

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email