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
initial_congestion_window?:uint64, // in bytes
minimum_congestion_window?:uint32, // in bytes // Note: this could change when max_datagram_size changes
Since both are congestion window values, using uint64 for both makes sense to me.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
junhochoi
changed the title
src_port, dst_port, minimum_congestion_window
units of src_port, dst_port, minimum_congestion_window
Jul 6, 2021
Not sure if we need uint64 at all for congestion windows though... I'd rather think that using uint32 for the initial cwnd would be better? (or are there systems doing +4GB bursts on new connections somewhere? :P)
congestion_window is also uint64, so I just think that initial_congestion_window and minimal_congestion_window need to be a same type. In practice it will fit into 32bit (10 x mss and 2 x mss, respectively), but no need to assign a different type for them only because they are small?
While I read the some of the event definitions, I have some questions:
https://github.com/quicwg/qlog/blob/main/draft-ietf-quic-qlog-quic-events.md#L312
uint16
for udp port numbers (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc768) looks good enough.https://github.com/quicwg/qlog/blob/main/draft-ietf-quic-qlog-quic-events.md#L1106
Since both are congestion window values, using
uint64
for both makes sense to me.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: