Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] MUST pace or limit bursts to 10 packets (#3106)

mirjak <notifications@github.com> Fri, 25 October 2019 07:39 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 15A8612080A for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 00:39:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.999 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, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 Vudr530QbUBy for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 00:39:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-23.smtp.github.com (out-23.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.206]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BEBD8120233 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 00:39:16 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2019 00:39:15 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1571989156; bh=6PuMtkGR9wnET/wmInrcyBgbA6OJLP2YTkK5wPhrDEo=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=xPHsczR4mQkT0tnpjUegydiYJ/cXTCYTUClWvyW7haRbGSX2xy3o+8WA73jEIkh5K CdYYSc7TlpT0Lhn2Ro200eHX4z3X9f0nZS+cyybCHsf6ia6qPzOtXIVnIgjQ25tuKL JBJBk3WlSyfqe/4xFl7c17OVn9OnvqqLZ+DR2KI8=
From: mirjak <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK3TDDUQE5HRLLRA5ZF3X7TTHEVBNHHB4SPHCQ@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3106/review/307029301@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3106@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3106@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] MUST pace or limit bursts to 10 packets (#3106)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5db2a6a3ed350_6df63fa9e88cd96823997"; 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
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/q812al6L2RHnfxJnDH3IKsyyPKs>
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: Fri, 25 Oct 2019 07:39:20 -0000

mirjak commented on this pull request.



> @@ -753,6 +753,12 @@ delivery of ACK frames is important for efficient loss recovery. Packets
 containing only ACK frames should therefore not be paced, to avoid delaying
 their delivery to the peer.
 
+Sending multiple packets into the network without any delay between them
+creates a packet burst that might cause short-term congestion and losses.
+Implementations MUST either use pacing or limit such bursts to minimum
+of 10 * kMaxDatagramSize and max(2* kMaxDatagramSize, 14720)), the same
+as the recommended initial congestion window.
+

Sorry again late here... To we recommend a fixed value of 10 packets or do we recommend to have the burst limit the same as the initial window? E.g. if we decide in future to increase our recommendation for the initial window, should that also increase the recommendation for the burst limit? I guess to be really smart about this, you would need to say that you set the burst but initial window but decrease if you see tail loss in the initial burst (but that might be an overkill). 

-- 
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/3106#pullrequestreview-307029301