> A small question to the editors, if this targets the general Internet - you 
> probably have an answer, there are various possibilities -  how will this 
> transport spec detect congestion, and what method will be used for congestion 
> control?

Datagrams are ack-eliciting and would use the same (ACK-clocking) congestion 
control as other reliable frames in QUIC. In other words, the congestion 
control is a shared state for datagrams + other frames.

Thanks,
Vidhi

> On Sep 8, 2021, at 10:26 AM, Gorry Fairhurst <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> A small question to the editors, if this targets the general Internet - you 
> probably have an answer, there are various possibilities -  how will this 
> transport spec detect congestion, and what method will be used for congestion 
> control?
> 
> Gorry
> 
>> On 8 Sep 2021, at 17:41, Ryan Hamilton <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Well said, Ian and Martin. I agree that no change is the right outcome here.
>> 
>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 8:53 AM Ian Swett 
>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> 
>> wrote:
>> Agreed, if we're going to do this, I'd like to address it in the ack 
>> frequency draft and not in datagram.  I also think there are valid use cases 
>> to not ACK stream data as well, such as Media over QUIC, where frames may 
>> not fit into a single QUIC packet.
>> 
>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 8:22 AM Martin Thomson <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> 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 
>> > <https://github.com/quicwg/datagram/issues/42>
>> 

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Reply via email to