IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: enumerate packets not to ack?

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Thu, 01 June 2017 09:24 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@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 DDC7A1200F1 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Jun 2017 02:24:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-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 3Om2WMIIs_FR for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Jun 2017 02:24:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf0-x234.google.com (mail-lf0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::234]) (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 6101C12EB55 for <quic@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Jun 2017 02:24:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf0-x234.google.com with SMTP id c184so18167299lfe.2 for <quic@ietf.org>; Thu, 01 Jun 2017 02:24:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=+8LlCh4R5ybh3bTr4lnn0DXKD2oT+qArQ5x5gaHopCQ=; b=HMsX2WoWCkmOluX03mdLnnNDWL0XE+/FwG5CRW+csnR8llcxWvAchvyFGFS+4Ojb8K BLlgwnSx2DeJpCuGDYTGQ8OHVJZkgdcwfOVXNIYgp0S7EvFy1egFcMEV5T8c9rOQ2He2 6448RNBpC85/HQOJbPS39m1+5DwUdbu2BL72R3kLxt6TYIpjGCmLxSrKzQABvFYohtZb SgPlsUvdx/rXl1eT/RmfR9r0fHUkMhWTOP9Akb2oXvtMVdtPjzk4D390+SCl4/lDp8uh sQJ/udqKNHuwWLu/gpq5B+X7+cv2WVIUx60VW3wMQz19LSpcH6x7wvtYVHTsYr863Wt3 SXiw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=+8LlCh4R5ybh3bTr4lnn0DXKD2oT+qArQ5x5gaHopCQ=; b=NhHK5e9WPlG0ceFsVqH8+yVBR0MU7puLlpyNjsIwQQwSDweRcMpXCly7ksgRyfDclw 2yCoWsvu8biQBaVEw11VKYHPWaXEmYhvTPH990XBmaXaLvdQNZjudTIacDhQU3pXcTZf l6vhiPfQHsqhN2t5xE0FsfHBZqibxp/czx1T+W3gXrtjkW02FviprB8A+ONHYZp1YgNH 9WAw0Gclxqe6kJIvAC0gX8czwoN4ogxf+kJYGnBlVqz6RtTaG9xi5ZTbuqUpoDSA+djZ ufNTUkOJ66PiooNJV2d6ewPAJ5DfrhfTrWQB6nhGSzr05VenCwJR+C3GD9vhVoBu3JsD eUKQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcCQMM1+rOpn2YTdztAGfJxtclNpZ5OCEY0p9OUWhauHMVfJJELz gmZpGPCOVyPRrU3tTFQ9UNFC2BIj6w==
X-Received: by 10.25.29.82 with SMTP id d79mr236829lfd.130.1496309091616; Thu, 01 Jun 2017 02:24:51 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.46.8.66 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Jun 2017 02:24:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <89f91631-063f-706c-b132-c24b72cab10e@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
References: <CAOdDvNqq=uBYTEdL0F1SYdTQXCxt31d-z=ZvRAqdb0784iURtg@mail.gmail.com> <CAGD1bZZPAU51+S4s+ywLyxzTo5_DFtbOn2NFFs3-SSXcw9b=3g@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnXvYGQJ=RFtkZ_wdN2WQGhOBu0_AvZsBQcQcgcDJWgJ+w@mail.gmail.com> <89f91631-063f-706c-b132-c24b72cab10e@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2017 19:24:51 +1000
Message-ID: <CABkgnnXni-pd843UwL-fa1gSSaDTDx=aa9QSds7dbYF3d3hshg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: enumerate packets not to ack?
To: Mirja Kühlewind <mirja.kuehlewind@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
Cc: Jana Iyengar <jri@google.com>, IETF QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>, Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/uQDHtTfH32akBGl6nHZzL6fX72Y>
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: Thu, 01 Jun 2017 09:24:55 -0000

On 1 June 2017 at 17:47, Mirja Kühlewind
<mirja.kuehlewind@tik.ee.ethz.ch> wrote:
> These are actually to different things. One is that you should not
> send/generate an ack frame just because you received an ack frame but no
> other data. The other point is that you actually can't really ack server
> retry or version negotiation because they don't have a valid packet number.


That might be better framing.  On the issue, I suggested that we
instead concentrate on describing what mechanisms we use to ensure
reliability.  I'm not sure that I got that right either, of course.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email