Skip to content
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

Don't ACK the ACK #366

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 7, 2017
Merged

Don't ACK the ACK #366

merged 2 commits into from
Mar 7, 2017

Conversation

martinthomson
Copy link
Member

Closes #291.

Note that #358 contains advice on using PING to elicit an ACK if the endpoint wants to reduce the range of packet numbers that its acknowledgments cover. We can rely on that same advice.

@ianswett, I don't know how you want to manage this and #358. If you want to fold this into #358, that might be best.

Copy link
Contributor

@ianswett ianswett left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let's land this first, because it looks just about landable as is and I assume the STOP_WAITING PR will take a bit longer.

after a reasonable number (currently 20) of such packets have been received.
frames containing the packet number of the received packet. To avoid creating
an indefinite feedback loop, an endpoint MUST NOT generate an ACK frame in
response to a packet containing only ACK and PADDING frames.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

nit: ACK and/or PADDING frames?

@janaiyengar janaiyengar merged commit f441d34 into master Mar 7, 2017
@MikeBishop MikeBishop deleted the ackack branch March 10, 2017 18:02
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants