Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Address change and consent to send (#161)

[MikkelFJ <[e-mail]>]

Would there be a concern related to address change forced by overcrowded mibile networks at conferences, festivals, and disasters?

________________________________
From: Martin Thomson <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 11:22:50 PM
To: quicwg/base-drafts
Cc: Subscribed
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Address change and consent to send (#161)


I guess that I'm in the "minimize the change that a congestion window gets re-opened inappropriately", absent more evidence that doing so wouldn't be too bad.

[...] you mean that you'd feed the signals into both the new controller created on IP/port change and the controller that existed before the change, swapping the latter in when the path validation succeeded?

Yes. There might need to be some tweaks to that if we consider the possibility that the previous path could be reused, but that's essentially it.

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/161#issuecomment-303855677>, or mute the thread<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AALzN7RK1WQGH0646ebrto8WUHlmkW-Eks5r9J-qgaJpZM4LlHwL>.


-- 
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/161#issuecomment-303924401