IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: nits in draft-ietf-quic-recovery-05

Jana Iyengar <jri@google.com> Fri, 15 September 2017 01:00 UTC

Return-Path: <jri@google.com>
X-Original-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48D57132CE8 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Sep 2017 18:00:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 rau95IKFqKyd for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Sep 2017 18:00:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf0-x229.google.com (mail-pf0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF340132C2A for <quic@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Sep 2017 18:00:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf0-x229.google.com with SMTP id x78so567908pff.10 for <quic@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Sep 2017 18:00:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=zLn8LvE+IviMZ8fWNJtWDGSkD/ftqXZU90lEC8lSnck=; b=mZH8Akbw2vElKRWyA+MD4W+NIki/F9phK6wI9K/l3feSkrwNG7QD5KqkMDzO/WRkbD cuU/4oXU7mIouAdTdvqdWPAwCP5wBX+6gPnotU8/aRskB1fXsWgh840GB8JqMsWQcE1Y So8AcDKp3uisVzh/Aw0Y6M3RjgBSyzuFWhdP/ZU5ZlTAhsPlG2NUW8ocZxGLLVTxcngn gCRC23grt2yzsBlxGdNqVavjoysLvaTkgrL8qAm1iKUK5RH1nsQvoHpu1p+YW/vgPJ9O LU+Pm3TldkaWFODWhV+QCTrhrObksNa8kY4dq4sJ9X5Nssj8hI8vtsM/4deSQUf3+QBA p6mQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=zLn8LvE+IviMZ8fWNJtWDGSkD/ftqXZU90lEC8lSnck=; b=HI7hMabAsLTePrO0hVxkWCjYGFZUautRBYn9OgJAIDy85lulSzNkP5G5arg4SWtv4S R5wAQBBb30yaSFRpWewlRVVar8kF5XVmhcwdvvH8PT43T57RX+pvrpNKotw7l4hhq+Xw TQFsrRVBezuilRfhMYQUyOmV1Gopub2UmGj7aYo3BjjSS6omXrUJn7l8gWD/gci9Uwqs RPVQl3oXvvzLod+452MQucKrWc9U7A6/Sjd8Zz/quOwPjfusc3okEP8Ara7k6kGNXdEq OwLRr1/YLP+N6JcK78oh1aykQenVg4Ht5+7rBDwaGPWikexSAS5mnpE9qViu1ybOXQT1 X3hQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUjav5/1nW8G93O73v3tF9Ilds5+UOVZELYMnFEEH28hAA6HdM10 lxXD6jr1rfEJc5yc/80yh8lZojP72Yd1/AaE0C/mB/44
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADKCNb4PYOSF5UPkegLcrVJqHfq18ME/4LLCSm7P9hzjOB9AhFhiN0QI/KlWbCtrk9gxJw06SkRiRcocUdqbqPwbpwo=
X-Received: by 10.98.245.8 with SMTP id n8mr22928672pfh.108.1505437209835; Thu, 14 Sep 2017 18:00:09 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.100.145.144 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Sep 2017 18:00:09 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <2269510d-90dc-483c-471b-f9b8d98dfa1b@huitema.net>
References: <6E58094ECC8D8344914996DAD28F1CCD8025EC@DGGEMM506-MBX.china.huawei.com> <CAGD1bZYEaFLZ-tmOzQgDEzaQ69qVE7odQuO0SUHp7amm+pBx_A@mail.gmail.com> <CACweHNCQ6mcRGdp=yWWZKHfgN1+JOFKf+dW_5SvPnySgkmEGcA@mail.gmail.com> <CAGD1bZbYG1KiaaHsCwvfHMmtS4P8e-f3kvYr0d=mWQ0fq-+PmA@mail.gmail.com> <2269510d-90dc-483c-471b-f9b8d98dfa1b@huitema.net>
From: Jana Iyengar <jri@google.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2017 18:00:09 -0700
Message-ID: <CAGD1bZYLTrQQ=Dw_6B+fy7BHhEWYajyMhjQs6BGPaRpnFoeu4A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: nits in draft-ietf-quic-recovery-05
To: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
Cc: IETF QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11439c3820427405592feace"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/9hOad2W6XQKxVVxvBOpa-8o8F-w>
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Main mailing list of the IETF QUIC working group <quic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 01:00:12 -0000

Christian -- yes, the overview needs rework. I'll try to do a rewrite
before the next set of drafts comes out.

On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
wrote:

>
>
> On 9/11/2017 2:41 PM, Jana Iyengar wrote:
> >
> > Oh, right, I missed that. Thanks for clarifying, I'll fix it (change
> > to "marks a packet as lost when a packet with a larger packet number
> > is acknowledged.")
>
> Except that's not true, because that simple statement does not take into
> account possible out of order deliveries. Indeed, the overview says: "A
> packet is marked as lost if at least one packet that was sent a
> threshold number of packets (kReorderingThreshold) after it has been
> acknowledged." But the overview is not correct either, because it does
> not consider time. A packet could still be marked as lost if
> "time_reordering_fraction + kDelayedAckTimeout" has elapsed since
> receiving an acknowledgement of a packet with a larger number.
>
> --
> Christian Huitema
>
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email