Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Fix language around CC on migration (#2918)

From: Jana Iyengar <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 06 Aug 2019 15:08:25 -0700

@janaiyengar pushed 1 commit.

e3e0d51ac2c99b7adb105f2a9e1fdbe51779f686  Apply suggestions from code review

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2918/files/ec3d2c564d8606b3243ba54aa3aff42c2793aa52..e3e0d51ac2c99b7adb105f2a9e1fdbe51779f686

---

From: Tommy Pauly <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2019 09:10:33 -0700

tfpauly commented on this pull request.

>  immediately reset the congestion controller and round-trip time estimator for
-the new path to initial values (see Sections A.3 and B.3 in {{QUIC-RECOVERY}}).
-
-An endpoint MUST NOT return to the send rate used for the previous path unless
-it is reasonably sure that the previous send rate is valid for the new path.
-For instance, a change in the client's port number is likely indicative of a
-rebinding in a middlebox and not a complete change in path.  This determination
-likely depends on heuristics, which could be imperfect; if the new path capacity
-is significantly reduced, ultimately this relies on the congestion controller
-responding to congestion signals and reducing send rates appropriately.
+the new path to initial values (see Sections A.3 and B.3 in {{QUIC-RECOVERY}})
+unless it has knowledge that a previous send rate or round-trip time estimate
+is valid for the new path.  For instance, an endpoint might infer that a change
+in only the client's port number is likely indicative of a NAT rebinding,
+meaning that the new path is likely to have similar bandwidth and round-trip
+time. This determination is likely to be imperfect.  If

Reading through this at an editorial level, it stands out a bit that the text says `likely` three times in the space of two sentences. I would argue that if an endpoint is inferring something, it's already clear that the state it is inferring is "likely" (but not certain) based on the fact that the state is inferred. I would suggest text like:

```
For instance, an endpoint might infer that a change
	in only the client's port number is indicative of a NAT rebinding,
	meaning that the new path is likely to have similar bandwidth and round-trip
	time. However, this determination will often be imperfect.
```

-- 
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/2918#pullrequestreview-272073804

---

From: Jana Iyengar <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 14:33:42 -0700

bc6ffc90c1c50053962c065e0f26ff50c9c12f12  likely too many uses of likely

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2918/files/e3e0d51ac2c99b7adb105f2a9e1fdbe51779f686..bc6ffc90c1c50053962c065e0f26ff50c9c12f12

---

From: Jana Iyengar <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 14:34:30 -0700

janaiyengar commented on this pull request.

Thanks for the editorializing, @tfpauly - incorporated.

-- 
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/2918#discussion_r313138864

---

From: Tommy Pauly <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 15:23:13 -0700

tfpauly approved this pull request.

-- 
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/2918#pullrequestreview-273981627

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 18:22:29 -0700

Merged #2918 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/2918#event-2561078420