IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Lost initial MAX_PUSH_ID is unfortunate

"Martin Thomson" <mt@lowentropy.net> Wed, 28 August 2019 03:00 UTC

Return-Path: <mt@lowentropy.net>
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 975911207FD for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 20:00:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lowentropy.net header.b=v7MB31u6; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=Pee4sDK8
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 0sCIwdkt4L9t for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 20:00:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68A4C120220 for <quic@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 20:00:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD147220C7 for <quic@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 23:00:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 27 Aug 2019 23:00:28 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :subject:content-type; s=fm3; bh=MXD6myCimMC0yTphiGbk5c09Wv0zk1f cIEK3qmaGhIw=; b=v7MB31u6uoRgG68nrMdl4V2pPOVn86sFfAWHmq+P4L448zR m5/R1Uq0Gr4RKzZrxmLtN+8IpsHQILPRlT+RVkn0vB9Dorfml3xIXZwm/VInlFpW aqPLdHtIdzU3TWHN5yWyGq/XxqwosIonHfaI8wB2WQrBuSWSI32wApf6o3xZxxrk Jmc+kC8gXiNxH+ymR5BLF1tIX92iXM3k39gFEcoHFNxH3xDsTEi8z3DbkX0zce23 Xzd4C0Fu/Y4i4777jVFtGJHGq4vEHeqpWpmnvBTfjO2aIwAFW89UxVjT9UeU/a87 nzNYb3FvI2Y7Jq8fpWR1vAe0bRGRYTLNOTfudVQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=MXD6my CimMC0yTphiGbk5c09Wv0zk1fcIEK3qmaGhIw=; b=Pee4sDK8OAaD0mIgZntDcc LgTOnW/5HzAf6OoKrB08CJOQbsE1+Uv7dy/9KBRgmnE5VzgaEoYAezy9mec6axVc mcLdBhslBwwH9B2564iGrPyfwa4u0xZCBZkuP/g0w47qU2oAy5Dut3uCacrl2jIG pMV9TF2hmSWDeXQ2ANhreIkiKP3yJZDxjt5HsRxTTbtsHLXm29fhdKBq46GkMj2a p/9ydV8SdPGAUwk9OzwILqW5LAJSkj8Ji4SD8tFzO1/es5YNC/zO9s/QcQX+rzbo aYUmxngk8ZaQ2tA+kARBG8LyGcR+KbGY+D/FoaVQ5h6TgQnz2Tw4nJiLAefsPTCA ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:TO5lXZ6hqQ2Rn6OUYWRHiq18dU12tpLZ7ogzu9XsMKyqCyks82LU8g>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduvddrudehledgieehucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtsehttd ertderredtnecuhfhrohhmpedfofgrrhhtihhnucfvhhhomhhsohhnfdcuoehmtheslhho figvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvghtqeenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehloh ifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:TO5lXfUe2YJIBwbwrC2dbO0l2kWTnjAzJR2lR-6rQvHUF6qvj0Qefg> <xmx:TO5lXQ68C6wU8ynB6rfKpjxLkHOrxRU9LpcU39xRbkvkBpHB036_tw> <xmx:TO5lXSp1UbNezKdqW2z1GB7E9REymtvMPOXynhoZpPaUmW7ACrLjMw> <xmx:TO5lXfiSZtgV7eiraNpmCGx1uiW9ZDiPDVvQ6sy4aog5h3x3kmNjkg>
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 6909FE00A3; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 23:00:28 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-139-g73fcb67-fmstable-20190826v1
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <1931a6f6-a25f-478e-b150-a200e0c3c69e@www.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJ_4DfSE4_2GR5peGeRuWnixgdc9ucGiXtab=c0fXbqedFHsgA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJ_4DfSE4_2GR5peGeRuWnixgdc9ucGiXtab=c0fXbqedFHsgA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 13:00:09 +1000
From: Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>
To: quic@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Lost initial MAX_PUSH_ID is unfortunate
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/EbHWa26DXA-h2v7g27P6kaDy9d4>
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: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 03:00:30 -0000

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019, at 08:48, Ryan Hamilton wrote:
> In some testing we've been doing, we realized that if the packet 
> containing the initial MAX_PUSH_ID frame is lost (or reordered until 
> after the first request) then the server is unable to push responses. 
> This is a bit unfortunate. We could, of course, bundle the MAX_PUSH_ID 
> with all packets that send a new request until the MAX_PUSH_ID is 
> ACK'd. This feels a tad inelegant and I wondered if there's any 
> appetite for an alternative.

I don't think that this is great justification for that sort of change.  We explicitly removed head of line blocking from the processing of SETTINGS.  In practice, I suspect that this situation also results in no access to QPACK also.

Performance might suffer, but at least you can send something sensible in a round trip when you would otherwise (with h2 for instance) be twiddling thumbs.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email