No change is good. It's nothing we can't fix trivially later if we find that was the wrong outcome. And getting this right, even if it were needed, would be tricky. It's also not all that useful when you consider that ack frequency exists as a way to manage the cost and overhead of acknowledgments.
On Wed, Sep 8, 2021, at 21:31, Lucas Pardue wrote: > Hello QUIC WG, > > This is a consensus call for datagram issue #42 [1] - Allow a Sender to > Control Datagram ACKs. The proposed resolution is to close this issue > with no action. > > If you object to the proposal, please do so on the issue or in response > to this message. > > The call will run for one week, closing at end of day on September 15 > 2021, anywhere on earth. > > [1] https://github.com/quicwg/datagram/issues/42
