Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Given recommendations on when/how often to send ACK frames (#230)

mirjak <notifications@github.com> Wed, 25 January 2017 07:36 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 6858A129868 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 23:36:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.601 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_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.199, 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 RNvqP_lYXYLH for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 23:36:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from o7.sgmail.github.com (o7.sgmail.github.com [167.89.101.198]) (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 D575C129861 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 23:36:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; h=from:reply-to:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:list-id:list-archive:list-post:list-unsubscribe; s=s20150108; bh=cw8mpaMmW/KHv9gk1Tf6/CC2Ilg=; b=G7HReUbWz0FqJ3sp kTCQqJn1mM/MV/FeKV8A0ysz+zbbxaoT5+APxcSIZfL0Qz7Hs0lEpFDR9HUSZ0ci cOoAN9B5K7Pqfzxe35oVEDWiChnkEgyNiQvfxjSoGz42MqZG2TDtZ+SABk6zZ5cT XagBQ2+MiJh8YrXpGTrhhV2fusE=
Received: by filter0049p1las1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter0049p1las1-26456-5888556A-3F 2017-01-25 07:36:10.810915686 +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 ismtpd0006p1iad1.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id T5zLE72TR36_1geJel50tQ for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 07:36:10.943 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 23:36:10 -0800
From: mirjak <notifications@github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/230/275039153@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/230@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/230@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Given recommendations on when/how often to send ACK frames (#230)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5888556ac90fc_786a3f97a428313029809b"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: mirjak
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-SG-EID: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak19mgKGbnxifK53tnv2w87h0hDRUxYa2kGIub Oof9BH8nrFy+pJmHRoleZqah4AnX9I6zT15AB2E4krI2cmEf7k3BbBFwsdDd0kn2DQpeo1PaTeOJPH VM5r0kEp3mUSEY2CDNKAMw2IBVqlrhtt1RPXXSAJgDsNHcdOEmpDqv/yyQ==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/mv039PhR1S21dm4jv9RZWdCIp-c>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Reply-To: quic@ietf.org
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, 25 Jan 2017 07:36:15 -0000

I think this bit should be in the transport draft (mainly because it's the receiver behavior that is rather independent of the recovery and congestion control at the sender)

-- 
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/230#issuecomment-275039153