Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] MIn_RTT management (#2923)

From: Jana Iyengar <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 13:43:06 -0800

@gorryfair : Having thought about this some more, I don't think we should be doing anything here. 

We need to define the constraints around min_rtt based on its use in the recovery document. As it stands, this document uses min_rtt for rejecting RTT samples that are too small. The cost of having a min_rtt that is too low is that the endpoint might allow for the SRTT to be smaller _when_ the peer is incorrectly sending ack-delays that are too large.

We knew this problem when we chose to use ack-delays in the SRTT computation and we decided to not solve it then. I don't think we need to solve it now.

-- 
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/issues/2923#issuecomment-573885013