Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Padding ACK-only packets (#837)

[Christian Huitema <[e-mail]>]

I do not like the concept that ACKs do not count for bytes in flight. With 255 ranges, ACKs can be almost 800 bytes long, and it is certainly possible to congest a link with just ACK. I understand that we want to be able to send ACK even when blocked by CC, but that does not mean an infinite number of ACK. I would prefer something like extra credits for ACK when blocked by CC, in a controlled way.

I like even less the idea that adding padding to a packet will make acknowledgements mandatory.

And the congestion control argument requires counting padding for CC -- whether included at the framing layer or the AEAD layer. Otherwise, you can send lots of bytes that don't count for CC, and indeed congest the link.

-- 
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/837#issuecomment-334792906