IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Proposed extension for delayed acknowledgments

Jana Iyengar <jri.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 28 January 2020 19:28 UTC

Return-Path: <jri.ietf@gmail.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 171A612004D for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Jan 2020 11:28:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 5175yHOuyLhc for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Jan 2020 11:28:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lj1-x235.google.com (mail-lj1-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::235]) (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 324E9120044 for <quic@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Jan 2020 11:28:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lj1-x235.google.com with SMTP id o11so15927517ljc.6 for <quic@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Jan 2020 11:28:51 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=VlW50ZHtyhcPqYF5EtUbPQTYbZxkv8rU8GPks+MfwJU=; b=DzSFf876j8lf1B9TJsKBY/tsX3aVZsCQq0pLmP8GGLJ24iTbWi5v/6asTqfK8DX5nV /s5dodpAyOhUcwLJYZTW2hFFm7MJS21ZTW9ICkZtQ/0bWcvgdaCaJAEpBHtWAFk0xgYe pzsOg6RJ/cLPPeWuB0WRQMjGB0YJ9eHnhktEWdpIdHwUpuwyukYuvlnnQGOHugwu3RcG SQRi34inqGSxOAO4puuOv6Dr09ZwVUxzsWMEF1v2h4vECqFaisjL7Z30IX6a4fQ9OPZS pKejkASPG1MnY8rQN5y9a1Nt9UUtrgMp7YL6bHztCcfK7K8v2BxkfajlUsGVA0EXoviM YZQA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=VlW50ZHtyhcPqYF5EtUbPQTYbZxkv8rU8GPks+MfwJU=; b=PykNDuGCRYb0t17ZSSLK/Qux3NqU9G0d7grbh9a2YeEQlicJ/Hlsi7NomRRzsdaGU5 Iv1abD+l7ayifn+nSLZ6a3yuZkdIMZT0+wNcNO8jC/FEzwj8eIkcfyNr+vewpfu/zDbb 6ZAs8Kn+a855R1s8EeCRvAb5CFMGllJqb7pemTWLSxqRqa/PT40EkOhPcFyb4GB7o3LV gTQDEOMRQUPIdmK7BZCRsEYipIUxAor2t5R4wyRByaCjxG+cBMCjiSyuA6sxIq0Y+Elo 43Nsu4rJ7lOXIDLtYvznq59F8KwABPCoObn1og0PMmbDFy6TU2P+vgr1X6CwMvNkcCti OHmw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXX9KHsxk2ymIE1o6Q5syvKQieIO8y0Gpkk9aGwk9UOORoJxtqj WvmAH0z0igWRPdK+AHCkPT0OmbNzKZ5v/Q715gM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwZMaALR3S+ZX/rtzCAvYxLSLvrGQ/wvtGdGEj0B0+gWGOE6knX1gIHOuYDpspg0zMSc5t8BKaLRmLAsQSjvM8=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:2201:: with SMTP id i1mr14143196lji.110.1580239729317; Tue, 28 Jan 2020 11:28:49 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CACpbDcdaGPZN1MpxE8GRV64dO8OK64xbCoUvxHPmCoCk9R-MOg@mail.gmail.com> <20200127135053.GB19655@ubuntu-dmitri> <CADdTf+hemtKr5M2MtssvzJn=vLuxxbM+G5i8Jh8XOJ2KV-1oow@mail.gmail.com> <20200127184007.GC19655@ubuntu-dmitri> <CALGR9oY549E-wyv4NMP9TR19cn2u_FCmFNDQZL_fW+0s2Jetrw@mail.gmail.com> <CH2PR22MB2086126A7E195BDD881E37A6DA0B0@CH2PR22MB2086.namprd22.prod.outlook.com> <CALGR9oYHZ36AH8NMV7u46DVT3saROg1krCVcWL1TN3oGxazD9Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALGR9oYHZ36AH8NMV7u46DVT3saROg1krCVcWL1TN3oGxazD9Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jana Iyengar <jri.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2020 11:28:37 -0800
Message-ID: <CACpbDcdd+ZWbgoRksAdepW6=3jW5QP3YNniX8RKV-GBX7eV3TQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Proposed extension for delayed acknowledgments
To: Lucas Pardue <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com>
Cc: Mike Bishop <mbishop@evequefou.be>, Matt Joras <matt.joras@gmail.com>, QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>, Ian Swett <ianswett@google.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b9e255059d383bdb"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/E4r9kCfNnrbCWrQM5KhgBxyBVHQ>
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 28 Jan 2020 19:28:54 -0000

On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 11:19 AM Lucas Pardue <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> On Mon, 27 Jan 2020, 21:15 Mike Bishop, <mbishop@evequefou.be> wrote:
>
>> The registry doesn’t exist until the document defining it ships, does
>> it?  So technically, there’s nothing to make a provisional registration in
>> at this point; we’re just picking a value and squatting on it.
>>
>> Fair point, I agree.
>
> As an individual, I might predict that we'll see a few proposals that need
> code points before the registries get set up. I think there is benefit in
> (provisional) provisional registration to help set a good example and adopt
> the spirit of the guidance.
>

Given the space available, I think informal agreement among implementers
(as we're doing here and now) is probably adequate. Let's not set another
system up in preparation for the provisional registry that ought to happen
Real Soon Now.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email