[quicwg/base-drafts] Inconsistency between early timeout calculations (#3524)

Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com> Sun, 15 March 2020 05:19 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 B81B93A0EEF for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 14 Mar 2020 22:19:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.008
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.008 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_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, 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 8nD8oxLTgacJ for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 14 Mar 2020 22:19:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-27.smtp.github.com (out-27.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.210]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C0933A0EED for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Sat, 14 Mar 2020 22:19:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-56fcc46.va3-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-56fcc46.va3-iad.github.net [10.48.102.32]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11321E0027 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Sat, 14 Mar 2020 22:19:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1584249554; bh=jU10V4tksUa/Zg8AtwKVFht6f4t0gC1Z1XPC5m8R+14=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=DmFyrcyuHJGPmnQnbW0yCAWZ9umFGpf3rWAPd4Gd7x6yPZ3UEtwHlukDoYgw1Mkw5 I47Ffry9d7mdqRoDPnZZO786wb1+DK2u+P0SLmTgYZrIwp7qrk4RWe5P7CIhd/JcD/ tzf6mSBseM9oyOLuRpXQ26fDXT+QfRIpnT/aqAlY=
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2020 22:19:14 -0700
From: Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK33IGYNR7LHLPHZRU54PGN5DEVBNHHCFKKXRM@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3524@github.com>
Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] Inconsistency between early timeout calculations (#3524)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e6dbad248b_d4d3f8c466cd95c21665"; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: kazuho
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/prdUiYVKSKXleQkRZAXFT1otlqE>
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: Sun, 15 Mar 2020 05:19:17 -0000

For each connection, the loss detection timeout is defined as 2 * InitialRTT.

I wonder if this should be 3 * InitialRTT instead, because, once you have one RTT sample, PTO is calculated as 3 * InitialRTT.

I do not think we have a reason to believe that the variance of RTT (which applies as a multiplier here) increases when we obtain the first sample?

-- 
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/3524