[quicwg/base-drafts] Recovery draft unclear about when to stop sending an ACK for every packet when packets are missing (#1968)
ianswett <notifications@github.com> Tue, 06 November 2018 04:48 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 421961294D0 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 20:48:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.47
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.47 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.47, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 Aq-mHZqXi-7f for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 20:48:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-7.smtp.github.com (out-7.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E4AA126BED for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 20:48:46 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2018 20:48:45 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1541479725; bh=MLUOlZEBpRfGmqfneH1nqbUXnrVUDjjUtCxQupAvc/Y=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=RNpaOniwoZEkX+FAvwDYfzssHMLmEcUcy3GEds46e9ngfbDXwlJ9tlRyn5V2QgNT4 AX/CmTHmDq7N2Owm3qBObG1yW/GC0/yFu0Athh5LdhtlMgV8RNqUkBKQaZ3vO4l1Vp TYaBX2QThWl08eqq6Cxvsi9xCgPGaw/5YL6HRivw=
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4aba4266762f704dec279c5d73e11ecf489b394f40192cf0000000117f8df2d92a169ce16831d88@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1968@github.com>
Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] Recovery draft unclear about when to stop sending an ACK for every packet when packets are missing (#1968)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5be11d2db6c97_6d423fd27bcd45b4764c8"; 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/uFDHVFzuVBFHiYOa06dNWoBbtro>
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, 06 Nov 2018 04:48:48 -0000
Stuart Cheshire asked when QUIC knows to stop sending immediate ACKs. I don't believe the recovery draft is sufficiently clear on what the optimal behavior is here. The draft indicates when to stop reporting old ACK ranges, but not when to stop sending immediate ACKs, so you could easily end up sending immediate ACKs for a full RTT. -- 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/1968