[quicwg/base-drafts] Is time based loss detection across packet number space? (#2544)
Yang Chi <notifications@github.com> Fri, 22 March 2019 03:10 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 490C41286D8 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Mar 2019 20:10:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.597
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.597 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_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 NaRlAKDFtL0s for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Mar 2019 20:10:11 -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 378F31277E7 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Mar 2019 20:10:11 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2019 20:10:09 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1553224209; bh=EWlB8sRkh4fCh1z0ktwSqkz6Qwp8xsJoYdCM2iLsgB4=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=E80awhqjHM6gQMJfYuRHzywvxtJd6iB9w0vYTMS8Jf9Y6hk+3kWiAHrx4exSt0eW9 Hqk9dso96J545H4L9UHuC9njmu0ts1xQfqF0Ws+xBG6VHyq7ug0sQkDXqTT4iIP+B7 Hcq5AJXhYuB5m1YwqFZkZSlEKdU2QSmOqYi6KoCs=
From: Yang Chi <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab4647ab96d3d753ec8efec3c70038a620bce06afc92cf0000000118ac141192a169ce194626e3@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2544@github.com>
Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] Is time based loss detection across packet number space? (#2544)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c9452119c223_55ad3ffae7cd45c0902b8"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: yangchi
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/vaUsWd0helzSVDMIPfVxrN0XwN4>
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, 22 Mar 2019 03:10:13 -0000
After Issue #1974 both packet threshold and time threshold are used to detect lost packets. When it comes to packet threshold, I'd imagine Ack in one PN space shouldn't mark another packet in another PN space lost. But how about time threshold? Intuitively I think it should but would love the specs to have clarification on that. Thanks. -- 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/2544