Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Change PTO to be per packet number space (#3066)

Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com> Tue, 24 September 2019 23:58 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 459F9120131 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 16:58:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8 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_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 BLPVzsvrUFZQ for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 16:58:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-2.smtp.github.com (out-2.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6AB3F120033 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 16:58:48 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2019 16:58:47 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1569369527; bh=M52EnQX/hDJJCdWLzfOUcXXAjRlDBYhoOTy2GMnIfhw=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=cWi66mbe0FpRduXhn02UVJndOUnWoBDSdFia0nEc0kpvxWZdw6g4UU/1gKT1pogHj GkAwJXFG9aeEqBAhTAJk7mxiX0drsvoZR25gP4H/QWiUFgNCgmEKlF5DHVTrKkCqJS wV7WirJt7RW7Q+SFQnUg+eo5T8JUP8vmbOLwogBo=
From: Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJKYOMKSAPVK54JUQKQ53S7JCPEVBNHHB3LP3EA@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3066/review/292766008@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3066@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3066@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Change PTO to be per packet number space (#3066)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5d8aadb7603b8_4b673fdd436cd968209695"; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: martinthomson
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/uRkDa1GurvtIRqeb-GHHbNqzrNY>
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, 24 Sep 2019 23:58:51 -0000

martinthomson commented on this pull request.

I think that if we're going to use this in resolving the key discard thing, then we'll need stronger support for the advice about sending in multiple spaces.

> @@ -438,11 +438,13 @@ and larger thresholds increase loss detection delay.
 A Probe Timeout (PTO) triggers sending one or two probe datagrams when
 ack-eliciting packets are not acknowledged within the expected period of
 time or the handshake has not been completed.  A PTO enables a connection to
-recover from loss of tail packets or acknowledgements. The PTO algorithm used
-in QUIC implements the reliability functions of Tail Loss Probe
-{{?TLP=I-D.dukkipati-tcpm-tcp-loss-probe}} {{?RACK}}, RTO {{?RFC5681}} and
-F-RTO algorithms for TCP {{?RFC5682}}, and the timeout computation is based on
-TCP's retransmission timeout period {{?RFC6298}}.
+recover from loss of tail packets or acknowledgements.  As with loss
+detection, the probe timeout is per packet number space.
+
+The PTO algorithm used in QUIC implements the reliability functions of
+Tail Loss Probe {{?TLP=I-D.dukkipati-tcpm-tcp-loss-probe}} {{?RACK}},

Is `{{?RACK}}` another citation for Tail Loss Probe?

> @@ -438,11 +438,13 @@ and larger thresholds increase loss detection delay.
 A Probe Timeout (PTO) triggers sending one or two probe datagrams when
 ack-eliciting packets are not acknowledged within the expected period of
 time or the handshake has not been completed.  A PTO enables a connection to
-recover from loss of tail packets or acknowledgements. The PTO algorithm used
-in QUIC implements the reliability functions of Tail Loss Probe
-{{?TLP=I-D.dukkipati-tcpm-tcp-loss-probe}} {{?RACK}}, RTO {{?RFC5681}} and
-F-RTO algorithms for TCP {{?RFC5682}}, and the timeout computation is based on
-TCP's retransmission timeout period {{?RFC6298}}.
+recover from loss of tail packets or acknowledgements.  As with loss
+detection, the probe timeout is per packet number space.
+
+The PTO algorithm used in QUIC implements the reliability functions of
+Tail Loss Probe {{?TLP=I-D.dukkipati-tcpm-tcp-loss-probe}} {{?RACK}},
+RTO {{?RFC5681}} and F-RTO algorithms for TCP {{?RFC5682}}, and the timeout

The commas here are odd.  I think that you could start a new sentence here:

```suggestion
RTO {{?RFC5681}}, and F-RTO  {{?RFC5682}} algorithms for TCP.  The timeout
```

Yeah, this is old text, but it's really confusing still.

> @@ -496,9 +500,7 @@ be considered an RTT sample.
 
 Until the server has validated the client's address on the path, the amount of
 data it can send is limited, as specified in Section 8.1 of {{QUIC-TRANSPORT}}.
-Data at Initial encryption MUST be retransmitted before Handshake data and
-data at Handshake encryption MUST be retransmitted before any ApplicationData
-data.  If no data can be sent, then the PTO alarm MUST NOT be armed until
+If no data can be sent, then the PTO alarm MUST NOT be armed until

```suggestion
If no data can be sent, then the PTO alarm MUST NOT be armed for the corresponding packet number space until
```

> @@ -522,9 +524,14 @@ removed from bytes in flight when the Initial and Handshake keys are discarded.
 ### Sending Probe Packets
 
 When a PTO timer expires, a sender MUST send at least one ack-eliciting packet
-as a probe, unless there is no data available to send.  An endpoint MAY send up
-to two full-sized datagrams containing ack-eliciting packets, to avoid an
-expensive consecutive PTO expiration due to a single lost datagram.
+in the packet number space as a probe, unless there is no data available to
+send.  An endpoint MAY send up to two full-sized datagrams containing
+ack-eliciting packets, to avoid an expensive consecutive PTO expiration due

I think that we can drop the "containing ack-eliciting packets" here, it's redundant with the first sentence.

> @@ -522,9 +524,14 @@ removed from bytes in flight when the Initial and Handshake keys are discarded.
 ### Sending Probe Packets
 
 When a PTO timer expires, a sender MUST send at least one ack-eliciting packet
-as a probe, unless there is no data available to send.  An endpoint MAY send up
-to two full-sized datagrams containing ack-eliciting packets, to avoid an
-expensive consecutive PTO expiration due to a single lost datagram.
+in the packet number space as a probe, unless there is no data available to
+send.  An endpoint MAY send up to two full-sized datagrams containing
+ack-eliciting packets, to avoid an expensive consecutive PTO expiration due
+to a single lost datagram.
+
+In addition to sending data in the packet number space for which the timer
+expired, the sender SHOULD coalesce ack-eliciting packets from all other packet
+number spaces with inflight data if sending coalesced packets is supported.

This is important, so I think that it needs more support.  Questions that arise are: What happens if I don't do this?  Under what conditions would it be fine not to send in both spaces?

> @@ -933,7 +940,7 @@ loss_detection_timer:
 pto_count:
 : The number of times a PTO has been sent without receiving an ack.
 
-time_of_last_sent_ack_eliciting_packet:
+time_of_last_sent_ack_eliciting_packet[kPacketNumberSpace]:

```suggestion
time_of_last_sent_ack_eliciting_packet\[kPacketNumberSpace]:
```

> @@ -1096,12 +1103,20 @@ Pseudocode for SetLossDetectionTimer follows:
 // Returns the earliest loss_time and the packet number
 // space it's from.  Returns 0 if all times are 0.
 GetEarliestLossTime():
-  time = loss_time[Initial]
+  return GetEarliestTimeAndSpace(loss_time)
+
+// Returns the earliest time_of_last_sent_ack_eliciting_packet
+// and the packet number space it's from.
+GetEarliestAckElicitingTime():
+  return GetEarliestTimeAndSpace(loss_time)

You have two identical functions here that don't seem to do anything other than indirect over the global.  I don't get this change.

-- 
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/3066#pullrequestreview-292766008