Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] SHOULD use adaptive thresholds (#3572)

Matt Olson <> Wed, 08 April 2020 23:27 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5016E3A19C1 for <>; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 16:27:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.174
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.174 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.168, 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 dgwxbg6H7L0g for <>; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 16:27:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 31C073A19C0 for <>; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 16:27:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EE7E6A101B for <>; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 16:27:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1586388448; bh=6DQHqnYeTS7RtaocaLJwAH5I6Sij3yVUr3XZfzWA3o4=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=mAookxoFjgwuHdJnmnY+54nLEvKCA4QkQp1677M/iJzRMXo4/3/HhEziRTl2Qyf/H K204Z7GC8EazAdb869EdyU/kuJS9qXgEvoS2rBxdoocrQXPLEAzBBL0ngb25n4HURZ buqgMpE86K5qUH+f9VsbbaLgr+sCLTjsRR80E4t8=
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2020 16:27:28 -0700
From: Matt Olson <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3572/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] SHOULD use adaptive thresholds (#3572)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e8e5de02dfe3_60da3fc94f0cd96c2124a9"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: maolson-msft
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: Wed, 08 Apr 2020 23:27:30 -0000

Since RFC4653 doesn't seem like it would map to QUIC as readily as the stuff in the RACK draft about reorder-threshold tuning (it seems to be all about extending the Limited Transmit algorithm), maybe RACK is a better reference?
c.f. "Update RACK reordering window"

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