Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] Extension frames and congestion/flow control (#1811)

From: ianswett <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2018 03:21:09 -0700

Fixes #1487
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1811

-- Commit Summary --

  * Extension frames and congestion/flow control

-- File Changes --

    M draft-ietf-quic-transport.md (5)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1811.patch
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1811.diff

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1811

---

From: MikkelFJ <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2018 03:35:37 -0700

mikkelfj commented on this pull request.

> @@ -1199,6 +1199,11 @@ that a peer is able to understand the frame.  An endpoint can use a transport
 parameter to signal its willingness to receive one or more extension frame types
 with the one transport parameter.
 
+Extension frames MUST be contestion controlled and MUST cause an ACK frame to

congestion

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1811#pullrequestreview-159806032

---

From: Lucas Pardue <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2018 03:38:40 -0700

LPardue commented on this pull request.

+Extension frames MUST be contestion controlled and MUST cause an ACK frame to
+be sent.  The exception is extension frames that replace or supplement the ACK
+frame.  Extension frames are not included in flow control unless specifically
+specified in the extension.

Specifically specified can probably be reduced to just specified

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1811#pullrequestreview-159806844

---

From: ianswett <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2018 07:21:57 -0700

@ianswett pushed 1 commit.

766240d  Update draft-ietf-quic-transport.md

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1811/files/0b1c808e20524916f9e22c1bd79bf65f80c445c5..766240d60e80b185ec7f08b345149072d651baea

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2018 12:16:51 -0700

Merged #1811 into master.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1811#event-1874272754

---

From: Rui Paulo <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2018 14:41:36 -0700

The requirement that it MUST be ACK'ed seems too strong.  Doesn't that prevent us from doing a completely unreliable stream?  I am aware that the current DATAGRAM proposals require ACKs but I don't agree with this PR.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1811#issuecomment-425677378