Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Omit already acknowledged ACK Blocks (#2245)

MikkelFJ <notifications@github.com> Sat, 22 December 2018 00:33 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 3EEF7130EAF for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Dec 2018 16:33:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.064
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.064 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.065, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32=0.001, 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 LUR099mD7-sB for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Dec 2018 16:33:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-5.smtp.github.com (out-5.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F54F130DF4 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Dec 2018 16:33:41 -0800 (PST)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2018 16:33:40 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1545438820; bh=tMqGdcwrI9tRDG8Xtd2WX2mz7M9Jx0VTec5RjQSbJOA=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=B0vWhFgmgPzm5/goEb5YdkkTj5C5rexJci/pyt8OkaIEAV8yXiGmh9B3ovV0r5Fnu FIXxgEvWuqxVqXaHz5arEdEg7FDltV2a6diUAp+Y7JK+sL5DO0/eXBRzcWmxZLXkzQ 2YxGBOGvoEZBV+m9Ip3nE2UhNc6azQ7yXVnimy3s=
From: MikkelFJ <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4abf8e5a39e53bbcfb759dadbd2813970c767989c7492cf000000011835486492a169ce1775e62e@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2245/review/187571376@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2245@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2245@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Omit already acknowledged ACK Blocks (#2245)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c1d86647ad7_55273fcf6bad45c4497630"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: mikkelfj
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/zSVO9hEY4Ihl8vz8UsvWDrPiuJE>
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: Sat, 22 Dec 2018 00:33:43 -0000

mikkelfj commented on this pull request.



> @@ -2858,8 +2858,8 @@ discussed in more detail in {{QUIC-RECOVERY}}.
 
 To limit ACK Blocks to those that have not yet been received by the sender, the
 receiver SHOULD track which ACK frames have been acknowledged by its peer.  Once
-an ACK frame has been acknowledged, the packets it acknowledges SHOULD NOT be
-acknowledged again.
+an ACK frame has been acknowledged, an endpoint SHOULD omit all ACK Blocks that
+have not changed since the ACK frame was sent from future ACK frames.

"The receiver SHOULD track which ACK frames have been acknowledged by its
peer in order to exclude already acknowledged packets from future ACK frames
whenever these packets would unnecessarily contribute to the ACK frame size."

I mention packets and not ranges or blocks because sometimes joining two blocks can reduce the size.

I wonder if adding "have been acknowledged or presumed lost" would make any sense.

-- 
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/2245#discussion_r243718254