IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpm] [Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gomez-tcpm-ack-rate-request-02.txt]

Ian Swett <ianswett@google.com> Wed, 23 March 2022 16:11 UTC

Return-Path: <ianswett@google.com>
X-Original-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A3683A1796 for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Mar 2022 09:11:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -17.609
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.609 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, 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, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, 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 PNCN-nptNEqp for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Mar 2022 09:11:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x42f.google.com (mail-wr1-x42f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42f]) (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 3A3143A1554 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Mar 2022 09:11:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x42f.google.com with SMTP id h23so2809655wrb.8 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Mar 2022 09:11:21 -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=uvEGSQ/GoEW5LBC2BrI4Gvz3azfrIcxCa+C58l9Kosw=; b=Se6cmWRIpCM+5auk332oH6L+XtTGUnsU+Qej7eNNCDAwmsgKLWqjkWkWzNbVWjpLUI OhWR7WQ6RFQxWgaop4Mza8T3Z9N8IUjRVriGWyJCbWjkJMkH1UJkepxOfw0bQyLMSW9y toork85ukemz7sp/ZzYfIoiGr3xkY6NQaziI/5aiUr/89OebiLJJ4GKcEwead01cztFB 8SO0R6J1XdRFf+afkeiFUdQobCx2VFIuyivsYCqZuL5Juh8FWSqvz347NddGdQ/he7uH id5h0HOLKmaeMC6xC4mJU+9DGeF2cZuAIpbB5pBX98wFgMVOZUED/rMCPWF+toNOMuYp 6zgA==
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=uvEGSQ/GoEW5LBC2BrI4Gvz3azfrIcxCa+C58l9Kosw=; b=26rfiwXdH34BUSc1GIuuFyBY0elBpkBcgUxxC7xJwudOFYXgkgJm0z0b/sGCJ2Zqxo O5fwAtimw25Im1T2WaVpaSXcO6BWC+0MREv0Q7+MUYwebz46QSkrdqq3BAapArhFUrfS R16t7QDqQPSo/jbs1PXXuLlzfbpcEpSty88PdctcP23kr9paHXuhumtLibsVIcvs26qq 6Li7BRwWzCl5I9s0BD68iSWo/+VaTe0CDK/kRfvTryf4P7D1sfbHjgLOg7qxYuZmGI1o 0PxknkMj0jVWACzm/s7LsZzaJCkqPwzOMHUCGRfzwBwNpk6JjZUCBVY/Kkaf8/14DpHo 3jVQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532hQsnNE4md1iHFDW020A3a+ojRdutlf5ZVAdfoiDvuxFQKHJTg i4DGDCqmNSD/8qImkGDcXhiUlXxvv6SR8KMnt2ayNNjb840=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwXpCIaTGqCLwpzAyZyZUswDYUwmO5vKoUek3PtVChbLHRfEGOy1jm9dgIoNZA4Kw9hFj/48rEnVSW4SmyyA3I=
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:59a2:0:b0:204:20d9:a5b9 with SMTP id p2-20020a5d59a2000000b0020420d9a5b9mr511122wrr.560.1648051878890; Wed, 23 Mar 2022 09:11:18 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <a7c8b301b51270e146481e65cffba6c7.squirrel@webmail.entel.upc.edu> <e478e70d-e5bb-9089-f0b5-392038bc4c87@bobbriscoe.net> <39aeaa5e98cd99288d2f43ea6504d22f.squirrel@webmail.entel.upc.edu> <ab51c2a0-04f8-aebf-2005-42973e74f51a@bobbriscoe.net> <E1nWx8A-0002bk-6f@mta1.cl.cam.ac.uk> <d5414e47ba9f1ea4a9db43c6c935cb7b.squirrel@webmail.entel.upc.edu> <CAAK044TvT4Hp2pJX_h1pRnxeHCmwgOc6eGPs4W00T11V9-5n2A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAK044TvT4Hp2pJX_h1pRnxeHCmwgOc6eGPs4W00T11V9-5n2A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ian Swett <ianswett@google.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2022 12:11:06 -0400
Message-ID: <CAKcm_gNDsmtJvqV-ycsVkzHu3iqeYDF=vmBEw+99OwUQbbPfgw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Yoshifumi Nishida <nsd.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: Carles Gomez Montenegro <carlesgo@entel.upc.edu>, "tcpm@ietf.org Extensions" <tcpm@ietf.org>, Jon Crowcroft <Jon.Crowcroft@cl.cam.ac.uk>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d0f2ca05dae4faa9"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/jZ3V1IAsCIOkXzCReQObBVLPs5w>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] [Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gomez-tcpm-ack-rate-request-02.txt]
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tcpm/>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2022 16:11:28 -0000

The QUIC Ack Frequency draft (draft-ietf-quic-ack-frequency
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-quic-ack-frequency/>) has an
ignore order feature, but QUIC also has the ability to deliver data in any
order.  There are some use cases that make sense for QUIC.

For TCP, the use case would be networks where it's known reordering is
prevalent.  Today there are a lot of devices on the path that try to keep
TCP segments in order, but these add complexity to the network. If no one
has networks with more prevalent reordering or plans to build them, then
maybe there's not a compelling use case for ignore order here?

Ian



On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 7:43 AM Yoshifumi Nishida <nsd.ietf@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I am not very sure, but I guess if we use TCP RACK and ignore reordering,
> it will mean we rely on only timer based retransmission scheme completely.
> There might be some situations where it works more efficiently than using
> dup acks.
> --
> Yoshi
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 4:16 AM Carles Gomez Montenegro <
> carlesgo@entel.upc.edu> wrote:
>
>> > thanks very much for this detailed review/feedback....
>>
>> +100.
>>
>> We plan to update the draft very soon, aiming to address your comments,
>> Bob.
>>
>> > I wasn't sure about the ignore order thing either....
>>
>> Same here... :)
>>
>> This feature was once suggested in a WG meeting, but it appears that
>> perhaps it is not so useful, so we might consider removing it in the next
>> draft update.
>>
> I plan to ask about this later today in the WG meeting.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Carles
>>
>> >> I would support this draft being adopted (as I've said numerous times
>> >> before).
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> tcpm mailing list
>> tcpm@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
>>
> _______________________________________________
> tcpm mailing list
> tcpm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email