Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Keep RFC6928 informative (#3287)

ianswett <notifications@github.com> Tue, 10 December 2019 14:30 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 94699120088 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 06:30:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.596
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.596 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_IMAGE_ONLY_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 BVo8tADi_K1l for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 06:30:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-5.smtp.github.com (out-5.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6FD721200C1 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 06:30:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from github-lowworker-275fa97.va3-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-275fa97.va3-iad.github.net [10.48.17.64]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80D46961A4D for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 06:30:04 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1575988204; bh=NmtF7xcW+AVd1YsggEpNs7XfQe8AffdBz5j/erLnVbc=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=sAgnJe35hOJjx3zP07MTAmJ3wwl526wqKh+rLFFaUEr+K2o8Z2NQWEOogI5zZjVR+ AnudKzWMZo8R5lyvzOOK9OzsggLSUexpjhQCozOtCmtIQteZ4t/2MbpuDMxp0tXkru 7DT+4/ORzgn8hzpezTwDZyhfCeehniQnIJK2Zy/c=
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2019 06:30:04 -0800
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK5WHMZI4I4PFFNH76F37TPGZEVBNHHB7VMV2I@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3287/review/329875366@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3287@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3287@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Keep RFC6928 informative (#3287)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5defabec72175_5a2d3fa708ecd9689865f"; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: ianswett
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/txIl1cO61XGE4kru05QTS-ifWMw>
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: Tue, 10 Dec 2019 14:30:08 -0000

ianswett commented on this pull request.



> @@ -1253,10 +1253,11 @@ papers, and common practice.  Some may need to be changed or negotiated
 in order to better suit a variety of environments.
 
 kInitialWindow:
-: Default limit on the initial amount of data in flight, in bytes.  Taken from
-  {{?RFC6928}}, but increased slightly to account for the smaller 8 byte
-  overhead of UDP vs 20 bytes for TCP.  The RECOMMENDED value is the minimum
-  of 10 * max_datagram_size and max(2 * max_datagram_size, 14720)).
+: Default limit on the initial amount of data in flight, in bytes.
+  This follows the analysis and recommendations in {{?RFC6928}}, increasing the
+  byte limit to account for the smaller 8 byte overhead of UDP compared to the
+  20 byte overhead for TCP.  The RECOMMENDED value is the minimum of
+  10 * max_datagram_size and max(2 * max_datagram_size, 14720)).

Done

-- 
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/3287#discussion_r356067946