Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] Resetting min_rtt (#3975)

From: Jana Iyengar <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 19:54:51 -0700

Closes #3927.

I believe this covers the discussion on the issue. I don&#39;t have a strong opinion on the use of RFC 2119 language here, and I&#39;m happy to remove all of that language if folks think that&#39;s better.

I would like not to bikeshed this, but I would also like to be on a beach right now, enjoying a lovely drink, and watching the sunset.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3975

-- Commit Summary --

  * reset the min_rtt

-- File Changes --

    M draft-ietf-quic-recovery.md (32)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3975.patch
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3975.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/3975

---

From: Marten Seemann <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 21:27:44 -0700

@marten-seemann commented on this pull request.

>  future RTT samples that are smaller than the new RTT to be included in
 smoothed_rtt.
 
+Endpoints SHOULD set the min_rtt to the newest RTT sample after persistent
+congestion is established. This is to allow a connection to reset its estimate
+of min_rtt and smoothed_rtt ({{smoothed-rtt}}) after a disruptive network event,
+and because it is possible that an increase in path delay resulted in persistent
+congestion being incorrectly declared.
+
+Endpoints MAY set the min_rtt to the newest RTT sample at other times in the
+connection, such as when traffic volume is low, to refresh the

... is low, and they receive an acknowledgement with a small ack_delay value

-- 
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/3975#pullrequestreview-459551651