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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

use a separate stream for every ping #391

Closed
marten-seemann opened this issue Aug 9, 2018 · 4 comments
Closed

use a separate stream for every ping #391

marten-seemann opened this issue Aug 9, 2018 · 4 comments
Assignees
@marten-seemann
Labels
kind/enhancement A net-new feature or improvement to an existing feature need/community-input Needs input from the wider community

Comments

@marten-seemann
Copy link
Contributor

Pings should be delivered independent of each other. It doesn't make a difference on transports that introduce HoL between streams, but it does on transports that offer streams at the transport level (i.e. QUIC).
@marten-seemann marten-seemann mentioned this issue Aug 9, 2018
Merged
@Stebalien
Copy link
Member

I'm not sure about this. We want an accurate RTT and, while, we should keep the overhead of new streams to near-zero, I wouldn't like to depend on it. Maybe I'm just being paranoid.

@marten-seemann
Copy link
Contributor Author

Where do you see the biggest overhead?
At the transport level, streams are basically for free (at least in QUIC). The amount of data sent will increase a bit, since we'll have to send the protocol ID (which is currently 16 bytes) on every stream, but I don't think that this really hurts, since a ping packet will still be small (16 bytes protocol ID + 32 bytes ping payload), much smaller than a typical MSS.

@Stebalien
Copy link
Member

Yeah, really, you're probably right.

@marten-seemann marten-seemann mentioned this issue Aug 30, 2018
Closed
@ghost ghost assigned marten-seemann Aug 30, 2018
@ghost ghost added the status/in-progress In progress label Aug 30, 2018
@bigs bigs added kind/enhancement A net-new feature or improvement to an existing feature need/community-input Needs input from the wider community labels Sep 4, 2018
@bigs
Copy link
Contributor

bigs commented Sep 4, 2018

do we think this is good to go? should we do some profiling?

@ghost ghost removed the status/in-progress In progress label Sep 6, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@marten-seemann marten-seemann

Labels
kind/enhancement A net-new feature or improvement to an existing feature need/community-input Needs input from the wider community
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@bigs @Stebalien @marten-seemann