Re: Consensus call for adding support for non-ack eliciting DATAGRAMs

Ian Swett <ianswett@google.com> Wed, 08 September 2021 15:53 UTC

Return-Path: <ianswett@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 D45013A2CE6 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Sep 2021 08:53:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -18.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-18.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.499, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5] 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 h-iG43rKyyCV for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Sep 2021 08:53:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yb1-xb35.google.com (mail-yb1-xb35.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b35]) (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 383193A2CE0 for <quic@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Sep 2021 08:53:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yb1-xb35.google.com with SMTP id v10so5233875ybm.5 for <quic@ietf.org>; Wed, 08 Sep 2021 08:53:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=xntRcxnhw55mYGOazdUEV01NJ73BZTXsG0Ol5dpUp7Q=; b=QTjw9ARgB5R+gSqEzJuq+EjqyKfzOKANANk4vDosW+RRA/FUzAXgTIVb4+CKRw5o7P tYd9dYA9rtJpGY7VKdySspNHurUcrVfTYwmFijKTRURl1OUDNljDUZWXnUvDMd3noJUg iAlMN7D/qYlBcx+X5YHJiLW3klX8ZqXkqAeqIC3Lo90YyUdcVEtHHYjgghJZebDSZ7wU zbU72+NzO1CWs7U0rN7WZn4fvWkDy6lPUTCnIZzboEN4Z1NyLM/Nae15ucKBpSBEamFz pfjbUnk7z4vTQ+j1U5HwZ5ZiurMn0+wVcxjx4WsYapBUUm6QgSKHM6EQ6KgagH1dbttF GDig==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=xntRcxnhw55mYGOazdUEV01NJ73BZTXsG0Ol5dpUp7Q=; b=Rp5gnxb73DcM4o9SuDLG+k+GB7yurrmbB9KWp9sB/db2Ze/BeoFO3YITQzta5AJfCi pkxWS36zcfeu8P0yl/rSU4pTdHLw/B0ORcuXOvqqzp6zmb1NlE4UcsnB+6UFuwYxmqEh 6oVCp9FJzcHqVsKNEsnjTAFmDWrfT12OmBv3Gc6t79MWZHiL7R2kCcOnpJO4xcDwsXwD 7ACfLzmvsskpX0zO0LXT2CjhzmtIKKKC8NJj1D/GgiwfSbj+raEpYfIR+FWw6xPOAfL4 XSp4nLpyS4gY7pH023fL8u6IBemYnUYhewtYMWP9t1Hh2JjDhLQosafKw+sCaCY77xT8 yvsw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530pthEqCsfw34dNeOuLW3S8fe7r4wI8z+PDu0uRiwKdFlcaZwPU P4j4pFFhXuKDMtSvNdoFsF8T67OJIA12Wi4Ga43lb55U1E4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxc+NLq4skNs+fbR1taek/Xv2dTU6TXPwptNzHMI0OIWBiwLbyqKmT5BGMn+CnrQjbROlezGx4jCSJwHjQsHCs=
X-Received: by 2002:a25:dd6:: with SMTP id 205mr4664142ybn.82.1631116400050; Wed, 08 Sep 2021 08:53:20 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CALGR9obraBc=LHs6625SnXPZZ=jy170a4dYACwLxaARkoY0_YA@mail.gmail.com> <16d22e18-a169-418c-89af-0355a241fbf0@www.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <16d22e18-a169-418c-89af-0355a241fbf0@www.fastmail.com>
From: Ian Swett <ianswett@google.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2021 11:53:08 -0400
Message-ID: <CAKcm_gOioEecFhEyptBaYmjvLkAteG33nJVpNspHEXM=iTd7Eg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Consensus call for adding support for non-ack eliciting DATAGRAMs
To: Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>
Cc: quic@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009d321805cb7de139"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/sgIfpJi4hP6_VGgeWqzgGLiNUwg>
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, 08 Sep 2021 15:53:27 -0000

Agreed, if we're going to do this, I'd like to address it in the ack
frequency draft and not in datagram.  I also think there are valid use
cases to not ACK stream data as well, such as Media over QUIC, where frames
may not fit into a single QUIC packet.

On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 8:22 AM Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net> wrote:

> No change is good.  It's nothing we can't fix trivially later if we find
> that was the wrong outcome.  And getting this right, even if it were
> needed, would be tricky. It's also not all that useful when you consider
> that ack frequency exists as a way to manage the cost and overhead of
> acknowledgments.
>
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2021, at 21:31, Lucas Pardue wrote:
> > Hello QUIC WG,
> >
> > This is a consensus call for datagram issue #42 [1] - Allow a Sender to
> > Control Datagram ACKs. The proposed resolution is to close this issue
> > with no action.
> >
> > If you object to the proposal, please do so on the issue or in response
> > to this message.
> >
> > The call will run for one week, closing at end of day on September 15
> > 2021, anywhere on earth.
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/quicwg/datagram/issues/42
>
>