-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 204
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Clarify the Timestamps section #360
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'd like to see more clarification of the "Delta Last Acknowledged 1..N" section. It's still not clear that this is relative to the last acknowledged.
draft-ietf-quic-transport.md
Outdated
@@ -1221,6 +1221,13 @@ Unlike TCP SACKs, QUIC ACK blocks are cumulative and therefore irrevocable. | |||
Once a packet has been acknowledged, even if it does not appear in a future ACK | |||
frame, it is assumed to be acknowledged. | |||
|
|||
QUIC ack frames contain a timestamp section with up to 255 timestamps. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ACK frames.
Added a section to further clarify that Delta Last Acknowledged 1..N" is relative to the last acknowledged |
@@ -1352,6 +1358,10 @@ receive times relative to the beginning of the connection. | |||
~~~ | |||
{: #timestamp-format title="Timestamp Section"} | |||
|
|||
The timestamp section is time-ordered, so the 1 byte Delta Largest | |||
Acknowledged is always relative to the Largest Acknowleged, but the Time | |||
Since Previous Timestamp fields are relative. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would suggest moving this to below the descriptions of the fields. Suggested rewording: "The timestamp section lists packet receipt timestamps ordered by timestamp." I think you can drop the rest of this paragraph since it's redundant with text in the descriptions.
Rebased and merged manually. |
@ianswett, can you try to remember to name your branches in future. These branch names are going to collide with old patches (as this one already did, causing me some confusion). |
Sure, I'm happy to name them. I didn't realize it mattered. |
Intends to resolve #308