Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Byte counting at Congestion avoidance (#3917)

Junho Choi <notifications@github.com> Wed, 02 September 2020 05:52 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 4AEEB3A0BD2 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Sep 2020 22:52:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.555
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.555 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, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, 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 08zqZ_3OHbSk for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Sep 2020 22:51:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-18.smtp.github.com (out-18.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4EBB83A0BD3 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Sep 2020 22:51:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-edec459.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-edec459.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.18.32]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7468D34092F for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Sep 2020 22:51:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1599025916; bh=whSaNCsD9YavH5cDI8DGZIu4vo7ubewobo423GQsPis=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=Eti7TSLc9jVky6ATq/NOOISkYs4naI+axdPky7XKJpo4VRxtZ3G+xkXtGZ0iF4S5s QasJCoRXcJov6neihnT0PJsvH4Ra9/eTta/imvhA+pTMr17Yz0Djqi2MTWmw1R2TnY 60NEQk5Fb07jCYNuYefE0QZvJF9eTGB7iOg0OxAA=
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2020 22:51:56 -0700
From: Junho Choi <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJKYHWHSME7V7DPIL3G55LMJ7ZEVBNHHCOPRYC4@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3917/review/480501488@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3917@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3917@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Byte counting at Congestion avoidance (#3917)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5f4f32fc654b0_382219643978cd"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: junhochoi
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/tg4DApboIZ-Naz2lDEcD0H0PnXM>
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: Wed, 02 Sep 2020 05:52:00 -0000

@junhochoi commented on this pull request.



> +      bytes_acked += acked_packet.sent_bytes
+      if (bytes_acked >= congestion_window):
+        bytes_acked -= congestion_window
+        congestion_window += max_datagram_size

This is a simulated environment, not an public internet. In this testing I used MacOS dummynet. As I said this number is what recovery module detected as loss (which will trigger a congestion event). So may not be an actual loss (e.g. delivered late after a time threshold). I didn't measure actual packet loss.
What's your expectation?

-- 
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/3917#discussion_r481745686