Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] Restore "Ignoring Loss of Undecryptable Packets" (#3450)

From: ianswett <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 09:05:25 -0800

And add some clarification.

Reverts #3442 with some additional changes
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3450

-- Commit Summary --

  * Restore &quot;Ignoring Loss of Undecryptable Packets&quot;

-- File Changes --

    M draft-ietf-quic-recovery.md (11)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3450.patch
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3450.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/3450

---

From: ianswett <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 14:48:18 -0800

@ianswett pushed 1 commit.

6f83adf98a19660a59eeb10ea6900a409def81c1  Merge branch 'master' into ianswett-restore-undecryptable

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3450/files/1885d3f63c64d0a657b8033c569e0ba074fd0249..6f83adf98a19660a59eeb10ea6900a409def81c1

---

From: ianswett <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 14:51:03 -0800

71193db5c14860fa56a73e4f0f76ba1822851d1c  Update draft-ietf-quic-recovery.md

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3450/files/6f83adf98a19660a59eeb10ea6900a409def81c1..71193db5c14860fa56a73e4f0f76ba1822851d1c

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:28:25 -0800

martinthomson approved this pull request.

I might have to put in a lint for HTAB...

> @@ -690,12 +690,14 @@ losses or increases in the ECN-CE counter.
 
 ## Ignoring Loss of Undecryptable Packets	
 
-During the handshake, some packet protection keys might not be	
-available when a packet arrives. In particular, Handshake and 0-RTT packets	
-cannot be processed until the Initial packets arrive, and 1-RTT packets	
-cannot be processed until the handshake completes.  Endpoints MAY	
-ignore the loss of Handshake, 0-RTT, and 1-RTT packets that might arrive before	
-the peer has packet protection keys to process those packets.	
+During the handshake, some packet protection keys might not be available when
+a packet arrives and the receiver can choose to drop the packet. In particular,
+Handshake and 0-RTT packets cannot be processed until the Initial packets
+arrive, and 1-RTT packets	cannot be processed until the handshake completes.

An errant tab here.
```suggestion
arrive and 1-RTT packets cannot be processed until the handshake completes.
```

> @@ -690,12 +690,14 @@ losses or increases in the ECN-CE counter.
 
 ## Ignoring Loss of Undecryptable Packets	
 
-During the handshake, some packet protection keys might not be	
-available when a packet arrives. In particular, Handshake and 0-RTT packets	
-cannot be processed until the Initial packets arrive, and 1-RTT packets	
-cannot be processed until the handshake completes.  Endpoints MAY	
-ignore the loss of Handshake, 0-RTT, and 1-RTT packets that might arrive before	
-the peer has packet protection keys to process those packets.	
+During the handshake, some packet protection keys might not be available when
+a packet arrives and the receiver can choose to drop the packet. In particular,
+Handshake and 0-RTT packets cannot be processed until the Initial packets
+arrive, and 1-RTT packets	cannot be processed until the handshake completes.
+Endpoints MAY	ignore the loss of Handshake, 0-RTT, and 1-RTT packets that might

and here
```suggestion
Endpoints MAY ignore the loss of Handshake, 0-RTT, and 1-RTT packets that might
```

-- 
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/3450#pullrequestreview-358624093

---

From: Marten Seemann <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 20:47:50 -0800

marten-seemann 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/3450#pullrequestreview-358710489

---

From: ianswett <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2020 08:14:04 -0800

198b88ea0b69441d3105901ae3280a135940a0c6  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/3450/files/71193db5c14860fa56a73e4f0f76ba1822851d1c..198b88ea0b69441d3105901ae3280a135940a0c6

---

From: MikkelFJ <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 09:38:26 -0800

mikkelfj commented on this pull request.

 
-During the handshake, some packet protection keys might not be	
-available when a packet arrives. In particular, Handshake and 0-RTT packets	
-cannot be processed until the Initial packets arrive, and 1-RTT packets	
-cannot be processed until the handshake completes.  Endpoints MAY	
-ignore the loss of Handshake, 0-RTT, and 1-RTT packets that might arrive before	
-the peer has packet protection keys to process those packets.	
+During the handshake, some packet protection keys might not be available when
+a packet arrives and the receiver can choose to drop the packet. In particular,
+Handshake and 0-RTT packets cannot be processed until the Initial packets
+arrive and 1-RTT packets cannot be processed until the handshake completes.
+Endpoints MAY ignore the loss of Handshake, 0-RTT, and 1-RTT packets that might
+have arrived before the peer has packet protection keys to process those
+packets. Endpoints MUST NOT ignore the loss of packets that were sent after
+the earliest acknowledged packet in a given packet number space.

How would that (not) impact the congestion controller?

-- 
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/3450#pullrequestreview-363574037

---

From: ianswett <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 12:02:31 -0800

ianswett commented on this pull request.

 

I'm unsure what you're asking?

-- 
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/3450#discussion_r383484552

---

From: MikkelFJ <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 13:37:45 -0800

If you send a packet you consume bytes in flight. If you do not get an ack for that packet, eventually it is lost. I'm not sure what it means to ignore in that context unless you complete ignore an earlier packet space. But perhaps the text refers to ignoring received packets, not sent packets. In that case I would say drop, not ignore.

-- 
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/3450#discussion_r383529337

---

From: Jana Iyengar <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 16:55:12 -0800

@janaiyengar pushed 1 commit.

ab20c818c34bc203c6ede46fb5dfd94a99a55d0a  Update draft-ietf-quic-recovery.md

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3450/files/198b88ea0b69441d3105901ae3280a135940a0c6..ab20c818c34bc203c6ede46fb5dfd94a99a55d0a

---

From: Jana Iyengar <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 16:55:44 -0800

janaiyengar 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/3450#pullrequestreview-366101046

---

From: ianswett <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 17:56:14 -0800

#3415 makes that extra clear I think.

-- 
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/3450#discussion_r385471040