IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] compensation of ack_delay is fragile against errors (#2060)

ianswett <notifications@github.com> Fri, 30 November 2018 02:18 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 E53A512F1AB for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Nov 2018 18:18:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.46
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.46 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-1.46, 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 eu0ALiLunmYa for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Nov 2018 18:18:40 -0800 (PST)
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 0DEE312D4E7 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Nov 2018 18:18:39 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2018 18:18:38 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1543544318; bh=Rpdhqd7JE6O9Yax0lz8sE+x+Cw/KThfa3Iwcehv7pgw=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=S6Q95nE4ah8lMRnqJsy7avmxMxIYtyb6CgXCuy77+cca/7+pVh2eqIFQjXx+/vPPG JgFiHKzy8q2jwRGUjerBpf7j93wwEGjh7BvE0VoPnpcr8yiqKmn17J4ySwgtJjYH+z nwqJY4QxL2sImShsBI7yqFVYpBKZf5a2TzFDQSh4=
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab8bb4b434e82ea65442065a1bb1e381b57193c3a792cf0000000118185ffe92a169ce16f4226e@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2060/443066647@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2060@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2060@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] compensation of ack_delay is fragile against errors (#2060)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c009dfed98ef_10c73faa1e0d45b4303413"; 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/vHcFCv5Q7noRui3KPv4pwn-fpSc>
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: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 02:18:42 -0000

In regards to min(ack_delay, max_ack_delay), it's critical to consider what srtt is used for, which is loss detection and timers(TLP and RTO).

If there is a high rate of ACK loss or if the peer's alarms are persistently waking up late, then the SRTT and/or RTTVar will increase, thereby increasing these timers.  If this happens very infrequently, then the EWMA will forget them relatively quickly.  I think that seems appropriate?

To think of the pathological case, what if a peer communicates a max_ack_delay of 0?  I think it's important the rest of the recovery machinery still functions correctly in that case.

-- 
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/2060#issuecomment-443066647

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email