Re: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability
Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen <mikkelfj@gmail.com> Tue, 19 December 2017 19:40 UTC
Return-Path: <mikkelfj@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 33BDF129C6B for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 11:40:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 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_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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=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 cnNKBEwpKOrD for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 11:40:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-io0-x22f.google.com (mail-io0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22f]) (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 AAA61128954 for <quic@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 11:40:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-io0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id l10so14786123ioc.3 for <quic@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 11:40:21 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=uC4uofQWvtU/Da8o8PnY+Y9sYCftCHXp/aHHXxPiqeM=; b=NnWKnZMmKn3FtjuoHmsVAM+XCCFxgogK6MdB7x49FK6o/zby/EyixV70gCZvUmb9Yv mdpeJ02tX89VNzt1V8Fpn8H0sPFbzN11PqkctdOD8foLtwZ3pH26eluCVjhbLsrlgPRD N9AscduIRVP7bTEM4NGJAExDVGW6D6I6lTcMN3TEgXBrSvRbzOPDAZKqFdoqYnV4VAQJ mC8OkHMokoqUMvCv+kQvhrV0YUdBtGHTRkFuI7KAi412PXYVIXmeh2yIx57qU38rJe4O wO8ElaSdPt5nPEq9GXCYU7ltw6B4mEVNyryyUK65qXBwBRYz5aqKbW7641wranS8qU1U XiPA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=uC4uofQWvtU/Da8o8PnY+Y9sYCftCHXp/aHHXxPiqeM=; b=G5B9U+hSy9s2vvJiccEjXkIZ8X3YiPLYUIIGnjJWUTdmb9iBxI8EVZGkrZsr28XD14 hqiglmBT0Cii5ywjmWe3HT0I3tqoX1iRctLJuY/PA6pzGrFxVz4hkSggV/KJH9efE4dB JQGlUW1CoS0vfYPFgRk66UsPU++gnu0cDbFE7LIEiIwLgrNmzXg0UOTkALvWWztxzSEy 4bYgRY43GJ9HN6EdpDHIUzNNrhYC9XoPDJdnIBE9iXe33yl8jnHPni54udru/9bC594L seKauv7BhFK6SZ9F0RaxxGtaK3Dxp74Fekhc1zrdYJHHr6nQ7HgM1FvOvd9It6PDz/8c pOEw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mJMsOyjuRiRenLxW50M7NPlJ/qHyacNQmb377yl61gC0IEGakO/ BbZBEF78FgFWKsIQIAyJvD+xto35I4ykdpg0ci73ow==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBotQDvEXInk8J8WpF6cMzAPPg154GznIsVizwROisfZLUTvRpVSlZEV9hzZewu4WR1W+pMnVdhgFWkxbnIF8faM=
X-Received: by 10.107.47.234 with SMTP id v103mr4917138iov.96.1513712421118; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 11:40:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 11:40:20 -0800
From: Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen <mikkelfj@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <8c35500c-0011-3a9c-6c01-b3440e112532@huitema.net>
References: <c1f5a6d8d21f423a93003f7b69dae882@usma1ex-dag1mb5.msg.corp.akamai.com> <8c35500c-0011-3a9c-6c01-b3440e112532@huitema.net>
X-Mailer: Airmail (420)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 11:40:20 -0800
Message-ID: <CAN1APdcPzzPeQKNDNiv2poQ_xFNaD3fWuaBRBCyJwt_jAh_hLg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability
To: "Lubashev, Igor" <ilubashe@akamai.com>, Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>, QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1135a438272be00560b6a3ca"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/ZWvYCqb4HHi3BQMwd9nmS2RWl-8>
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: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 19:40:23 -0000
I did come up with a proposal with segmented stream data for partial reliability. It’s not too coherent as it evolved, but here it is: https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/433 Applications could also do their internal framing and forward the min for each internal frame and let transport decide if retransmission is worthwhile. If the application needs to make business decisions it might be out of the loop for too long. QUIC might be scheduled a lot more often than applications talking to QUIC. Kind Regards, Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen On 19 December 2017 at 20.31.17, Christian Huitema (huitema@huitema.net) wrote: On 12/18/2017 7:39 PM, Lubashev, Igor wrote: > The high-level idea is that the sender keeps track of messages within > a stream and can “expire” old messages whenever it wants. The > “expiration” is a signal to the transport to not retransmit expired > data (and a signal to the other endpoint that this data will not be > retransmitted). All details are in the draft. I read your draft, and it does indeed provide "partial reliability." My problem is that for RTP style applications, you don't want just partial reliability. You also want application frame delimitation, such as delivering isolated VOIP frames, doing loss compensation, or implementing application level FEC for large video frames. The streams in QUIC don't provide that. They implement a "byte stream" abstraction, not a "packet stream". So I really wonder whether FTP style applications are better served by adding partial reliability to the current concept of streams, or whether we should just add a different service, maybe creating "RTP_STREAM" frames. -- Christian Huitema
- draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Lubashev, Igor
- Re: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Phil Sorber
- RE: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Lucas Pardue
- RE: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Lubashev, Igor
- RE: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Lucas Pardue
- RE: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen
- RE: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Lucas Pardue
- RE: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen
- RE: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Lubashev, Igor
- Re: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Roberto Peon
- RE: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen
- Re: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Christian Huitema
- Re: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen
- Re: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Ian Swett
- RE: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Ingemar Johansson S
- Re: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Ian Swett
- Re: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Roberto Peon
- RE: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Lubashev, Igor
- Re: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Colin Perkins
- Re: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Christian Huitema
- RE: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Lubashev, Igor
- RE: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Lubashev, Igor
- RE: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Lubashev, Igor
- Re: draft-lubashev-quic-partial-reliability Eggert, Lars