Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

acks are not congestion control -> be careful #478

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

mirjak
Copy link
Collaborator

@mirjak mirjak commented Dec 20, 2024

this PR is a clarification based on the discussion in issue #454. Of course it's optimal to add this recommendation or not. However, it's in the implementation considerations section and I think at least noting the issue is a good thing.

this PR is a clarification based on the discussion in issue #454. Of course it's optimal to add this recommendation or not. However, it's in the implementation considerations section and I think at least noting the issue is a good thing.
@mirjak mirjak requested review from huitema, Yanmei-Liu and qdeconinck and removed request for huitema and Yanmei-Liu December 23, 2024 14:12
Copy link
Contributor

@huitema huitema left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I still think this is not needed. I think that we should expurgate that kind of text from the draft, and place it is a separate informational document, but if you really want to add it, I wont stand in the the way. In that case, I suggest a minor rewrite.

and thus better performance. As packets that only carries PATH_ACK frames
are not congestion controlled, sending only PATH_ACK frames on a path
should carefully consider the load induced by these packets, especially
if the capacity is unknown on that path.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The additional sentence uses the passive form and is a bit hard to read. If we want something, I would suggest:

However, since packets that only carries PATH_ACK frames
are not congestion controlled, senders should carefully consider the load induced by these packets, especially
if the capacity is unknown on that path.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants