Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Ack Delay and TLP (#1796)

ianswett <notifications@github.com> Tue, 25 September 2018 17:21 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 96B49126DBF for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Sep 2018 10:21:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.455
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.455 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.456, 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, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 1NWfgrDZhYuj for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Sep 2018 10:21:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-4.smtp.github.com (out-4.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC3E5124D68 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Sep 2018 10:21:56 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2018 10:21:56 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1537896116; bh=z7r9tlovaKZ+uxFzmeUlKFSNJJGr46KNoZieIWvSNRg=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=0r94/nmCQy9eIiU7Z2QOopNhw2vIVOT4kpRN5pHpOP9mXo2mnAfq6UIt2og++o/bh 4beR7qUQWw3IzTFcWRAeHSgDfVbp+iTcIteETy5pIlE+e+RbVAcjP8w/MUobwAKjwW DmC3DMIL3fgPhuMY8fanvY14LOIP7dFAckT1Tn84=
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4abf70815d5875494c66f02acc2e0ee09f7ffd67b0b92cf0000000117c230b492a169ce15ac2c4e@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1796/review/158652586@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1796@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1796@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Ack Delay and TLP (#1796)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5baa6eb415808_cf73f85082d45c0123130"; 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/y8ZW9ZflIbhr_gXEVsbDhJtJ6JA>
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, 25 Sep 2018 17:21:59 -0000

ianswett commented on this pull request.



> @@ -365,7 +352,11 @@ receiver.
 The timer duration, or Probe Timeout (PTO), is set based on the following
 conditions:
 
-* PTO SHOULD be scheduled for max(1.5*SRTT+MaxAckDelay, kMinTLPTimeout)
+* If less than 2400 bytes are in flight, PTO SHOULD be scheduled for

My understanding is that TCP waits for 2 full-sized packets, so I was trying to specify something similar to that in bytes.  The issue here becomes what constitutes a full-sized packet if the packet size changes?  Maybe keeping a max received packet size is reasonable?

We can add a packet count, but it's yet another variable to track and I don't think receiving two tiny packets would cause an immediate ACK in TCP, so I wouldn't expect it to in QUIC.

-- 
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/1796#discussion_r220280495