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

fix unimplementable prioritization #563

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

fix unimplementable prioritization #563

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

fluffy
Copy link
Contributor

@fluffy fluffy commented Sep 30, 2024

Consider a case where the relay has passed the UDP packet to the linux kernel but the kernel has not sent it yet and then the priorities are changed. There is no way to get the priority for the data that already in the send Q.

@fluffy fluffy added the Needs Discussion Tags for issues which need discussion, ideally at an interim or IETF meeting. label Sep 30, 2024
Copy link
Collaborator

@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.

LG on making a change here, but I'm unsure what is exactly the best phrasing.

@@ -627,7 +627,7 @@ implementation-dependent, but the expectation is that all subscriptions will
be able to send some data.

The subscriber's priority can be changed via a SUBSCRIBE_UPDATE message.
This updates the priority of all unsent data within the subscription,
This updates the priority of future data within the subscription,
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

What about just all data in the subscription? Technically, if data is sent, then lost, when you retransmit it you might want to use the updated subscription priority, for example.

Suggested change
This updates the priority of future data within the subscription,
This updates the priority of all data within the subscription,

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yah, I'm not sure best wording. If the data has already been passed to QUIC stack, probably very hard to change the priority of the data. I'm think we need words that might be a bit vague here. It seems data published by original publisher after the priority change clearly need to be handled at new priority but stuff that was inflight when the change was made may or may not get the new priority.

@ianswett
Copy link
Collaborator

This section was entirely rewritten in #518 , so I think this PR is OBE.

@ianswett ianswett closed this Nov 10, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Needs Discussion Tags for issues which need discussion, ideally at an interim or IETF meeting.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants