Re: Proposed extension for delayed acknowledgments

[Jana Iyengar <[e-mail]>]

Thanks for proposing the TP: I'll update the draft to use it, knowing that
we're squatting on it.
FWIW, I'm going to change the Reordering TP to a frame, per the discussion
on #18 <https://github.com/janaiyengar/ack-frequency/issues/18>, so hold
off on implementing that bit if you can.

On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 1:15 PM Mike Bishop <[e-mail]> 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.
>
>
>
> (Which, to be clear, is a totally reasonable experimentation strategy
> within the working group.)
>
>
>
> *From:* QUIC <[e-mail]> *On Behalf Of * Lucas Pardue
> *Sent:* Monday, January 27, 2020 3:06 PM
> *To:* Matt Joras <[e-mail]>; Jana Iyengar <[e-mail]>;
> QUIC WG <[e-mail]>; Ian Swett <[e-mail]>
> *Subject:* Re: Proposed extension for delayed acknowledgments
>
>
>
> Having been guilty of writing proposals that include "TBD" codepoints
> myself, I think it would be a good idea if proposals started to exercise
> the provisional registration policy defined in QUIC Transport draft 25
> Section 22.1.1 [1]
>
>
>
>    Provisional registration of codepoints are intended to allow for
>
>    private use and experimentation with extensions to QUIC.  Provisional
>
>    registrations only require the inclusion of the codepoint value and
>
>    contact information.  However, provisional registrations could be
>
>    reclaimed and reassigned for another purpose.
>
> That saves interested folk from having to come up with their own in order
> to do experimental interop. (thanks for picking something and soliciting it
> Dmitri).
>
>
>
> Lucas
>
>
>
> [1] -
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-quic-transport-25#section-22.1
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 6:46 PM Dmitri Tikhonov <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Cool.  As for TP, let's use 0xDE1A ("DEL"ayed "A"ck)?
>
>   - Dmitri.
>
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 10:01:35AM -0800, Matt Joras wrote:
> > I'll bite. I can do my best to implement it for interop. We already have
> a
> > mechanism to do something with an out-of-band configuration.
> >
> > Matt
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 5:51 AM Dmitri Tikhonov <
> [e-mail]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I'll commit to implementing this by the Interop next week if at least
> > > one other implementation does so as well.
> > >
> > > Takers?  (And let's pick the TP ID.)
> > >
> > >   - Dmitri.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 01:50:59PM -0800, Jana Iyengar wrote:
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > Ian and I have proposed an extension to enable sender-side control of
> > > > acknowledgement frequency: draft-iyengar-quic-delayed-ack-00
> > > > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-iyengar-quic-delayed-ack/>.
> > > >
> > > > The problem this extension solves was originally discussed in #1978
> > > > <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1978>, where we agreed
> > > that
> > > > this might be best done in an extension. The desire to reduce the
> > > frequency
> > > > of acknowledgements was more recently brought up and discussed in
> #3304
> > > > <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3304>, where it seemed
> > > clear
> > > > that there was interest in working on this now. This proposed
> extension
> > > is
> > > > a result.
> > > >
> > > > This is an individual draft. Please feel free to use the following
> github
> > > > repo, which is NOT the working group's repo, for filing issues and
> > > > discussion pertaining to the draft:
> > > > https://github.com/janaiyengar/ack-frequency
> > > >
> > > > - jana
> > >
> > >
>
>