Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Packet number echo with variable-length numbering (#391)

[Brian Trammell <[e-mail]>]

There's another consideration: how useful the information is for passive measurement. Here, Option 2 edges out Option 1 for passive RTT measurement -- since the echo signal is more frequent, observation points can have higher-fidelity estimates with less state. Given this, I'm leaning in favor of option 2 as well.

Echo isn't very helpful for loss measurement -- most of the literature on one-point loss measurement makes use of the fact that TCP exposes retransmissions. After spending a few minutes at the whiteboard this morning, the only not-terrible idea that comes to mind is having a detailed RTT series (as possible with Option 2, but not with option 1) and estimating events generated by loss bursts by looking for transients in residuals in the RTT series. Loss estimation that doesn't suck needs additional information, such as adding a ConEx-like signal as discussed in #279.

-- 
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/391#issuecomment-287321805