Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PTO probes are sent too frequently (#3546)

ianswett <> Mon, 30 March 2020 14:20 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 973223A168B for <>; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 07:20:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.082
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.082 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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_24=1.282, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, 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 SPE81_f8yN1Y for <>; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 07:20:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 58CB33A1689 for <>; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 07:20:50 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 07:20:49 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1585578049; bh=ADgs+KOtYTNgxtQh2WTEr2meHQwG1PMZQNa3c56L7SU=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=Brk6sIkoh28HHeqqBFLSYwUw21JbM0618h+GxZ0Uz6SBlATpkWM20YJiXBRnSG8yG vMGUBC1FPmSrX40gWwA7F0UEtOTL9fnv5J/QVmmSSeCuDzOuEqHdYLxOCnR2bdhchY s+H1BSQ90A0P2bYRmhqR9lHw9IF485gmf0xYmZJk=
From: ianswett <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3546/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PTO probes are sent too frequently (#3546)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e820041789f5_42683f7e264cd9644945c1"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: ianswett
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: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 14:20:52 -0000

I updated the PR to only do this for the client, since I think that's the right thing to do.

I did the Initial check because I thought it was slightly simpler than the `peer not awaiting address validation` check, which I believe is equivalent, since receiving an Initial ACK means you still have Initial keys, so the server is awaiting address validation.  As soon as a Handshake ACK is received by the client, it knows the server has completed address validation.

But I could also use the PeerNotAwaitingAddressValidation() method that's already defined(and mistakenly not used, see #3555 

Then I think the check would be:
If (PeerNotAwaitingAddressValidation())
  pto_count = 0

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