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

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jan 22, 2025
Merged

acks are not congestion control -> be careful #478

merged 5 commits into from
Jan 22, 2025

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.

draft-ietf-quic-multipath.md Show resolved Hide resolved
draft-ietf-quic-multipath.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@qdeconinck qdeconinck left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No strong opinion here. I think it is fine in the implementation section, but this section starts being very large...

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.

Looks OK, besides on nit.

draft-ietf-quic-multipath.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
draft-ietf-quic-multipath.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@mirjak
Copy link
Collaborator Author

mirjak commented Jan 17, 2025

No strong opinion here. I think it is fine in the implementation section, but this section starts being very large...

@qdeconinck the implementation section is currently 4.5 pages. It has a bunch of subsections but most of them are short. I think that is fine and I think we should more concentrate to have all the other sections concise and to the point. However, again, I'm planning to do a full editorial pass and I can imagine that some alignment in the implementation section might also make that part a bit shorter. Therefore I think we should merge for now.

draft-ietf-quic-multipath.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@mirjak mirjak merged commit 218435d into main Jan 22, 2025
3 checks passed
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.

4 participants