IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [QUIC] QUIC ACK frames and one-way transfer time (was RE: Drafts structure and split)

Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 28 October 2016 16:50 UTC

Return-Path: <ted.ietf@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 A9086129436 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 09:50:51 -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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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=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 m1Xmv8mkS9On for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 09:50:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk0-x235.google.com (mail-qk0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::235]) (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 3E6E2129598 for <quic@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 09:50:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk0-x235.google.com with SMTP id z190so93108701qkc.2 for <quic@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 09:50:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=5Pa2t0eZTIzfhZRfG/eD/yPlMl/EKnfZUZtAFRJl+XQ=; b=qEGSXzbfgfZJVG+hOircH8fhCshh9Nz1fMbLjPd2iqWjaC02vi9eVhnm5C+5kTLg/j 3p0sciujUeBK1WC72O5pRRdUI94oztisTd7QQ9cneX9pDogH41HR9EUutQRoQK9kVZEE jOQ1d8OaXH15jxA8M+ceuBXgYihqPptZg1QsdEJJqUR8GbZsHfhFKPX2of1yE+3RrspE EmhyDTiIWFdyWA6ZHCn+oC+Z5uxEv17swSjY+6d0tN15TCr658f1/J5hjVkzgr9aU2Do d79ZIDsKMQbbzLSpWq5RzeWbsFRrJEpcsSZY0+JtKxyCKmxC68SmXHrxMtz9728I4+mM zE6w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=5Pa2t0eZTIzfhZRfG/eD/yPlMl/EKnfZUZtAFRJl+XQ=; b=K8aG1ymPBSRASlCBwi2uSgLqE46mCs0qreIoTzpSN+7injNxgAFblEXr8BCwaa0npy hI3Vk9K8tIhUhQ97XjMwlychUZdPSsaPAaketjeqI30x+UCrkBrffzhx3HhomTsUsquh i+C0p6me6dP4ycj3bfcjcVVwzMJ/7zvKrH4l7iNsuR11puczfWVCxMellt5AOXcKYIqf lcsdO5Dbrad4yOc4GpJJ4+t5a0+jpcxYyP5ZO2A5O63nS5XFpr1LV6TdM9bCn5BzJEnl feM2rJ6blYmVBa/q9wlmTg/zDg19C35axZN4o54fUk6Cqqxa9reJ6cGvDZb1We4u5vDy JdPg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvdAGpwPHc+X8CBRfSh/G9Z2ywyEhqy5FiDkD42JgUqtfUkpyrpdV61Cca6oRO75hvlxWO/zITLH2HRJvw==
X-Received: by 10.55.119.132 with SMTP id s126mr11528161qkc.38.1477673449391; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 09:50:49 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.12.140.8 with HTTP; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 09:50:19 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <01de01d22fae$aae5fd60$00b1f820$@huitema.net>
References: <DBXPR07MB35198069351E83CC0BE9014C2AB0@DBXPR07MB351.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <CAJ_4DfQZw3dOjutqxbtOcAut_iM4FVbYEh2EUNsE9XbPChHiWw@mail.gmail.com> <DBXPR07MB351274DBBCBD2FA7655D83BC2AB0@DBXPR07MB351.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <01de01d22fae$aae5fd60$00b1f820$@huitema.net>
From: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 09:50:19 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+9kkMAdU2x=5daW8jvU=+XKz0M5_5mZO12jabUrXjwf6fNxqw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c0665c60bb0ac053fefa906"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/vwn761IS3CVub4V8KRXem5Q64x8>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 21:24:31 -0700
Cc: Ian Swett <ianswett@google.com>, Kyle Rose <krose@krose.org>, Ryan Hamilton <rch@google.com>, Ingemar Johansson S <ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.com>, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>, Jana Iyengar <jri@google.com>, marcelo bagnulo braun <marcelo@it.uc3m.es>, Jim Roskind <JimRoskind@gmail.com>, quic@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [QUIC] QUIC ACK frames and one-way transfer time (was RE: Drafts structure and split)
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mailing list to discuss QUIC standardization <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: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 16:50:51 -0000

On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
wrote:

> On Wednesday, October 26, 2016 10:10 AM, Ingemar Johansson wrote:
>
> > That was interesting.
> > I probably need some pen and paper exercise to figure out how good
> synchronization
> > one can get this. If it is within 20-30ms (rough figure) then it can be
> useful. Otherwise
> > it can still be useful as it can help to remedy for instance late comers
> advantage and
> > base-delay inflation issues that is a known problem for LEDBAT.
>
> If an implementer really feels ambitious, there is enough information in
> the ACK to run an NTP style algorithm and compute skew and lag. That will
> drive the precision in the millisecond range.


My employer may have IPR that covers this approach.  I'm working with our
legal folks to get a disclosure filed.

Of course, that's not really necessary for any practical purpose. The
> receiver measured ACK delay is quite sufficient.
>
>
I agree with this; while there are cases where you might want and need
this, I don't really think this is one of them.

regards,

Ted


> -- Christian Huitema
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> QUIC mailing list
> QUIC@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email