You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In draft-quic-ietf-recovery, packet_number is listed as a parameter. But it is not used in the pseudocode, is not sent on to SetLossDetectionAlarm(), and there is no obvious place that SetLossDetectionAlarm() would use it.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
It's there so I can store the time when the packet was sent, and then use that later to calculate the RTT. I'll send out a PR that does that and clarifies some other details and you can see what you think.
I wonder whether the loss detection and recovery mechanisms can be explained without the use of the pseudo-code, which seems like a cop-out. The pseudo-code does not match what occurs in proto-quic code. (This is probably OK, as the draft may be describing a future version of QUIC.)
In addition, alarm mode is mentioned, but the different modes are not listed.
* Replace magic numbers with constants and define RTT calculations
Defines how variables such as smoothed_rtt and rttvar are calculated, as well as replacing many numbers with constants.
Intends to fix#107
* Update draft-ietf-quic-recovery.md
* Remove trailing whitespace
* More trailing whitespace
* Update draft-ietf-quic-recovery.md
* Whitespace
mnot
added
the
editorial
An issue that does not affect the design of the protocol; does not require consensus.
label
Apr 19, 2017
In draft-quic-ietf-recovery, packet_number is listed as a parameter. But it is not used in the pseudocode, is not sent on to SetLossDetectionAlarm(), and there is no obvious place that SetLossDetectionAlarm() would use it.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: