IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PMTUD (#64)

ianswett <notifications@github.com> Mon, 05 December 2016 23:53 UTC

Return-Path: <bounces+848413-a050-quic-issues=ietf.org@sgmail.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 3140A12954D for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Dec 2016 15:53:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.279
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.279 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_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.896, 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 EkyBpCbhUFeS for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Dec 2016 15:53:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from o8.sgmail.github.com (o8.sgmail.github.com [167.89.101.199]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 43A73129EA8 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Dec 2016 15:53:29 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=github.com; h=from:reply-to:to:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:list-id:list-archive:list-post:list-unsubscribe; s=s20150108; bh=7oUlx9Q0mMjUJyXadRzqdy3ztNc=; b=eufND14RHp8yO59E E/JabArt/yoxuArlxIrTYd8Egr8PTqMUIhOsXyRe2yudpJVvvzlnCUHy2+ygXoJg ZyCkJGUEeVBhSfXxspw4XCTdBLNg5dRu4YM3UxaGpwMhd+qDN04ggcUN+GXhzMaY 3zd8F943slervqIlg8+jSDp7cO0=
Received: by filter0463p1mdw1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter0463p1mdw1-5970-5845FDF6-D 2016-12-05 23:53:26.180018859 +0000 UTC
Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net [192.30.253.16]) by ismtpd0003p1iad1.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id ZhDzVMpDQcavvnMf9pJ4tw for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 05 Dec 2016 23:53:26.078 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2016 15:53:25 -0800
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/64/265016665@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/64@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/64@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PMTUD (#64)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5845fdf5ec7ab_7a623f889acf913c922f4"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: ianswett
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-SG-EID: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak1F7n4Ske/gDHlr5gBtu21pvqOIvK3tWSgM3W +r2mYbaN33CvRCxmZnEpMeuo5UZO7Ar/3bKi5ReQ+y+5MW2n5lKmRjokMP1Vsfl1ov2/vYgCGRy02/ u8IsHzAgTwP8K+QmXnrnrbUv95R4eEp40KeBePlTEIxJC3lnCKn4Bb7bmBnRGgF/cjnlsY6wfz4sNT k=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/mKojxeitcDgt6PEnMcU2Ec8QSX0>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab7301c54dfd4c6679375462acd1f37e4f062f9ae892cf00000001145dbff592a169ce0b80e2d9@reply.github.com>
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: Mon, 05 Dec 2016 23:53:31 -0000

In practice today, we're losing less than 10% of the potential packet size, but I agree it isn't ideal.

Can you clarify why padding the CHLO is not sufficient?

-- 
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/64#issuecomment-265016665

v2.35.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status