Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Updated spinbit text (#2564)

mirjak <> Tue, 02 April 2019 12:12 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5759F1201AE for <>; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 05:12:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.001
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.001 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_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 Yusq3IL5hbqO for <>; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 05:12:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 663E912015D for <>; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 05:12:21 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2019 05:12:19 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1554207139; bh=eV9Uc/hrEfQlAVf122Bkfah9G/2WoLVwHeVbyq1RiVI=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=qMEsqyC+MBtJldLfhvoSRbbOtCogv5RVm8aQZDHKUoR1d+FJfPGHM8594l9msffd/ PSeSsplaFOk05vQaoigcrLx1DnOvd3a3iRwaUIksvegHSvXzpwMzLUkERWg64nubJH JAzMrh5e6mcxMWVtB+jgXgwEyQUw5jgs7MoxRB70=
From: mirjak <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2564/review/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Updated spinbit text (#2564)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5ca351a33dfe8_370b3fc6040d45bc129144"; 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
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: Tue, 02 Apr 2019 12:12:23 -0000

mirjak commented on this pull request.

> +the spin bit on a randomly chosen fraction of connections. The random selection
+process SHOULD be designed such that on average the spin bit is disabled for at
+least one eighth of network paths. The selection process should be externally
+unpredictable but consistent for any given combination of source and destination
+address and port. The selection process performed at the beginning of the
+connection SHOULD be applied for all paths used by the connection.
+In case multiple connections share the same five-tuple, i.e. same source and
+destination IP address and UDP port the setting of the spin bit needs to be
+coordinated across all connections to ensure a clear signal to any on path
+measurement point, however that might not be feasible.
+When the spin bit is disabled, endpoints MAY set the spin bit to any value, and
+MUST accept any incoming value. It is RECOMMENDED that they set the spin bit to
+a random value either chosen independently for each packet, or chosen
+independently for each path and kept constant for that path.

Yes, we should allow for this flexibility. In fact there is no way to not allow for it. I'm just saying we should recommend per-connection random values as the preferred way to do it.

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