Internet-Draft Congestion Control Convergence July 2024
Kuhn, et al. Expires 9 January 2025 [Page]
Workgroup:
Internet Engineering Task Force
Internet-Draft:
draft-ietf-tsvwg-careful-resume-10
Published:
Intended Status:
Standards Track
Expires:
Authors:
N. Kuhn
Thales Alenia Space
E. Stephan
Orange
G. Fairhurst
University of Aberdeen
R. Secchi
University of Aberdeen
C. Huitema
Private Octopus Inc.

Convergence of Congestion Control from Retained State

Abstract

This document specifies a cautious method for IETF transports that enables fast startup of congestion control for a wide range of connections. It reuses a set of computed congestion control parameters that are based on previously observed path characteristics between the same pair of transport endpoints. These parameters are saved, allowing them to be later used to modify the congestion control behavior of a subsequent connection.

It describes assumptions and defines requirements for how a sender utilizes these parameters to provide opportunities for a connection to more rapidly get up to speed and rapidly utilize available capacity. It discusses how use of Careful Resume impacts the capacity at a shared network bottleneck and the safe response that is needed after any indication that the new rate is inappropriate.

Status of This Memo

This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

This Internet-Draft will expire on 9 January 2025.

▲

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

All Internet transports are required to either use a Congestion Control (CC) algorithm, or to constrain their rate of transmission [RFC8085]. In 2010, a survey of alternative CC algorithms [RFC5783], noted that there are challenges when a CC algorithm operates across an Internet path with a high and/or varying Bandwidth-Delay Product (BDP). This mechanism targets a solution for these challenges.

A CC algorithm typically takes time to ramp-up the sending rate, called the "Slow-Start phase", informally known as the time to "Get up to speed". This defines a time in which a sender intentionally uses less capacity than might be available, with the intention to avoid or limit overshoot of the available capacity for the path. This can increase queuing (latency or jitter) and/or congestion packet loss for the flow. Any overshoot can have a detrimental effect on other flows sharing a common bottleneck. A sender can use a method that observes the rate of acknowledged data, and seek to avoid an overshoot of the bottleneck capacity (e.g., Hystart++ [RFC9406]). In the extreme case, an overshoot can result in persistent congestion with unwanted starvation of other flows [RFC8867] (i.e., preventing other flows from successfully sharing the capacity at a common bottleneck).

The present document specifies a CC mechanism, called Careful Resume, which is expected to reduce the time to complete a transfer when the transfer sends significantly more data than allowed by the Initial congestion Window (IW), and where the BDP of the path is also significantly more than the IW. It introduces an alternative mechanism to select initial CC parameters, that seek to more rapidly and safely grow the sending rate controlled by the congestion window (CWND). CC algorithms that are rate-based can make similar adjustments to their target sending rate.

Careful Resume is based on temporal sharing (sometimes known as caching) of a saved set of CC parameters that relate to previous observations of the same path. The parameters include: the saved_cwnd for the path and the minimum Round Trip Time (RTT). These parameters are saved and used to modify the CC behavior of a subsequent connection between the same endpoints. Some congestion control algorithms may use other parameters. For example, implementations using BBR also retain the value of the bottleneck bandwidth required to reach the capacity available to the flow (BBR.max_bw, see [I-D.cardwell-iccrg-bbr-congestion-control]).

When used with the QUIC transport, this provides transport services that resemble those that could be implemented in TCP, using methods such as TCP Control Block (TCB) [RFC9040] caching.

1.1. Use of saved CC parameters by a Sender

CC parameters are used by Careful Resume for three functions:

  1. Information to confirm whether a saved path corresponds to the current path.

  2. Information about the utilised path capacity to set CC parameters.

  3. Information to check the CC parameters are not too old.

"Generally, implementations are advised to be cautious when using saved CC parameters on a new path", as stated in [RFC9000]. While this statement has been proposed in the context of QUIC standardization, this advice is appropriate for any IETF transport protocol. Care is therefore needed to assure safe use and to be robust to changes in traffic patterns, network routing, and link/node conditions. There are cases where using the saved parameters of a previous connection is not appropriate (see Section 3.2).

1.2. Receiver Preference

Whilst a sender could take optimization decisions without considering the receiver's preference, there are cases where a receiver could have information that is not available at the sender, or might benefit from understanding that Careful Resume might be used. In these cases, a receiver could explicitly ask to enable or inhibit Careful Resume when an application initiates a new connection.

Examples where a receiver might request to inhibit use Careful Resume include:

  1. a receiver that can predict the pattern of traffic (e.g., insight into the volume of data to be sent, the expected length of a connection, or the requested maximum transfer rate);

  2. a receiver with a local indication that a path/local interface has changed since the CC parameters were saved;

  3. knowledge of the current hardware limitations at a receiver;

  4. a receiver that can predict additional capacity will be needed for other concurrent or later flows (i.e., prefers to activate Careful Resume for a different connection).

A related document proposes an extension for QUIC that allows sender-generated CC parameters to be stored at the receiver [I-D.kuhn-quic-bdpframe-extension]. This avoids the need for a sender to retain transport state for each receiver. It also allows the receiver to express a preference for whether a sender ought use Careful Resume.

1.3. Transport Protocol Interaction

The CWND is one factor that limits the sending rate of a transport protocol. Other mechanisms also constrain the maxmimum sending rate. These include the sender pacing rate and the receiver-advertised window (or flow credit), see Section 5.7.

1.4. Examples of Scenarios of Interest

This section provides a set of examples where Careful Resume is expected to improve performance. Either endpoint can assume the role of a sender or a receiver. Careful Resume also supports a bidirectional data transfer, where both endpoints simultaneously send data (e.g., remote execution of an application, or a bidirectional video conference call).

In one example, an application uses a series of connections over a path. Without a new method, each connection would need to individually discover appropriate CC parameters, whereas Careful Resume allows the flow to use a rate based on the previously observed CC parameters.

In another example, an application connects after a disruption had temporarily reduced the path capacity. When the endpoint returns to use the path using Careful Resume, the sending rate can be based on the previously observed CC parameters.

There is particular benefit for any path with an RTT that is much larger than typical Internet paths. In a specific example, an application connected via a satellite access network [IJSCN] could take 9 seconds to complete a 5.3 MB transfer using standard CC, whereas a sender using Careful Resume could be reduce this transfer time to 4 seconds. The time to complete a 1 MB transfer could similarly be reduced by 62 % [MAPRG111]. This benefit is also expected for other sizes of transfer and for different path characteristics when a path has a large BDP.

2. Language, Notation and Terms

This subsection provides a brief summary of key terms and the requirements language.

2.1. Requirements Language

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.

2.2. Notation and Terms

The document uses language drawn from a range of IETF RFCs. The following terms are defined:

  • Careful Resume (CR): The method specified in this document to select initial CC parameters and to more rapidly and safely increase the initial sending rate.

  • CC parameters: A set of saved congestion control parameters from a observing the capacity of an established connection (see Section 1.1).

  • CWND: The congestion window, or equivalent CC variable limiting the maximum sending rate;

  • current_endpoint_token: The Endpoint Token of the current receiver;

  • current_rtt: A sample measurement of the current RTT;

  • Endpoint Token: A token identifying a path to a receiver Section 4;

  • flight_size: The current volume of unacknowledged data;

  • jump_cwnd: The resumed CWND, used in the Unvalidated Phase.

  • LifeTime: The time for which the saved CC parameters can be safely re-used.

  • max_jump: The configured maximum jump_cwnd;

  • PipeSize: A measure of the validated available capacity based on the acknowledged data;

  • saved_cwnd: The preserved capacity derived from observation of a previous connection (see Section 5.1);

  • saved_endpoint_token: The Endpoint Token associated with a set of CC parameters;

  • saved_rtt: The preserved minimum RTT (see Section 5.1).

  • Unvalidated Packet: A packet sent when the CWND has been increased beyond the size normally permitted by the congestion control algorithm; if such a packet is acknowledged, it contributes to the PipeSize, but if congestion is detected, it triggers entry to the Safe Retreat Phase.

3. The Phases of CC using Careful Resume

This section defines a series of phases that the congestion controller moves through as a connection uses Careful Resume.


Observing ...> Connect -> Reconnaissance --------------------> Normal
(Normal)                 |                                    ^
                         v                                    |
                        Unvalidated --------------------------+
                         |      |                             |
                         |      +--> Validating --------------+
                         |               |                    |
                         |               |                    |
                         +---------------+--> Safe Retreat ---+
Figure 1: Key transitions between Phases in Careful Resume

An established connection in the Normal Phase is permitted to start observing CC parameters. The key phases of Careful are illustrated in Figure 1. Examples of the transitions between phases are provided in Appendix A.

3.1. Observing

An established connection in the Normal Phase, can save a set of CC parameters for the specific path to the current endpoint. Each set of CC parameters includes the saved_endpoint_token and the LifeTime (e.g., as a timestamp after which the parameters must not be used).

  • Observing (saved_cwnd): The saved_cwnd is a measure of the currently utilised capacity for the connection, measured as the volume of bytes sent during an RTT. This could be computed by measuring the volume of data acknowledged in one RTT. If the measured CWND is less than four times the Initial Window (IW) a sender can choose to not save the CC parameters, because the additional actions associated with performing Careful Resume for a small CWND would not justify its use.

  • Observing (saved_rtt): The minimum RTT is saved as the saved_RTT.

Implementation notes are provided in Section 5.1.

3.2. Reconnaissance Phase

A sender enters the Reconnaissance Phase after connection setup. In this phase, the CWND is initialised to the IW, and the sender transmits initial data. The CWND MAY be increased using normal CC as each ACK confirms delivery of previously unacknowledged data (i.e., the CC is unchanged).

The phase seeks to determine if the path is consistent with a previously observed path (saved as a set of CC parameters). The following conditions need to be confirmed before the sender enters the Reconnaissance Phase:

  • Reconnaissance Phase (Endpoint change): If the current_endpoint_token is not the same as one of the saved_endpoint_tokens, the sender MUST enter the Normal Phase. (A difference in the Endpoint Token indicates a the network path was different to one that was observed.)

  • Reconnaissance Phase (Lifetime of saved CC parameters): The CC parameters are temporal. If the LifeTime of the observed CC parameters is exceeded, the CC parameters are not used and the sender enters the Normal Phase.

The following actions are performed during the Reconnaissance Phase:

  • Reconnaissance Phase (Confirming the RTT): During this phase, a sender MUST record the minimum RTT for the current connection as the current_rtt.

  • Reconnaissance Phase (Detected congestion): If the sender detects congestion (e.g., packet loss or ECN-CE marking), the sender MUST enter the Normal Phase to respond to the detected congestion.

  • Reconnaissance Phase (Using saved_cwnd): Only one connection can use a specific set of saved CC parameters. If another connection has already started to use the saved_cwnd, the sender MUST enter the Normal Phase.

  • Reconnaissance Phase (Path confirmed): When a sender has confirmed the RTT and also has received an acknowledgement for the initial data without reported congestion, it MAY then enter the Unvalidated Phase. This transition occurs when a sender has more data than permitted by the current CWND.

If a sender is rate-limited [RFC7661], it might send insufficient data to be able to validate transmission at the higher rate. A sender is allowed to remain in the Reconnaissance Phase and to not transition to the Unvalidated Phase until there is more data in the transmission buffer than can be sent using the current CWND. In some implementations, the decision to enter the Unvalidated Phase could need coordination with the management of buffers in the interface to the upper layers.

When a path is not confirmed, Careful Resume is not used and the sender enters the Normal Phase.

Implementation notes are provided in Section 5.2.

3.3. Unvalidated Phase

The Unvalidated Phase is designed to enable the CWND to more rapidly get up to speed by using paced transmission of a tenatively increased CWND. The following conditions need to be confirmed before the sender enters the Unvalidated Phase:

  • Unvalidated Phase (Confirming the path on entry): If the current_rtt is greater than or equal to (saved_rtt / 2) or the current_rtt is less than or equal to (saved_rtt x 10) (see Section 5.2.1), the sender MUST enter the Normal Phase (see trigger rtt_not_validated in Section 6). The calculation of a sending rate from a saved_cwnd is directly impacted by the RTT, therefore a significant change in the RTT is a strong indication that the previously observed CC parameters are not be valid for the current path.

On entry to the Unvalidated Phase, the sender:

  • Unvalidated Phase (Initialising PipeSize): The variable PipeSize if initialised to CWND on entry to the Unvalidated Phase. This records the CWND before the jump is applied.

  • Unvalidated Phase (Setting the jump_cwnd): To avoid starving other flows that could have either started or increased their use of capacity after the Observation Phase, the jump_cwnd MUST be no more than half of the saved_cwnd. Hence, jump_cwnd is less than or equal to Min(max_jump,(saved_cwnd/2)). CWND = jump_cwnd.

The following actions are performed during the Unvalidated Phase:

  • Unvalidated Phase (Pacing transmission): All packet sent in the Unvalidated Phase MUST use based on the current_rtt.

  • Unvalidated Phase (Confirming the path during transmission): If a sender determines that the previous CC parameters are not valid (due to a detected path change), the Safe Retreat Phase is entered. (In the Unvalidated Phase, insufficient time has passed for a sender to receive feedback validating the the jump in CWND. Therefore, any detected congestion must have resulted from packets sent before the Unvalidated Phase.)

  • Unvalidated Phase (Tracking PipeSize): The variable PipeSize is increased by the volume of data acknowledged by each received ACK. (This indicates a previously unvalidated packet has been succesfuly sent over the path.)

  • Unvalidated Phase (Receiving acknowledgement for an unvalidated packet): The sender enters the Validating Phase when an acknowledgement is received for the first packet number (or higher) that was sent in the Unvalidated Phase (see first_unvalidated_packet_acknowledged in Section 6).

When the flow is controlled using BBR, Careful Resume is implemented by setting the pacing rate from the saved congestion control parameters, with the following precautions:

  • The flag "carefully-resuming" is added to the BBR state, and initialized to "False" when the BBR flow starts;

  • Careful Resume is only activated if a BBR flow is in the Startup state;

  • The probing rate is set to 1/2 of the bottleneck bandwidth in the saved congestion control parameters.

  • The sender starts the Unvalidated Phase at the beginning of a round, and sets the "carefully-resuming" flags to "True";

  • When the "carefully-resuming" flag is set, the sender sets the BBR pacing rate to the larger of the nominal pacing rate (BBR.bw times BBRStartupPacingGain) and the probing rate. The CWND is set to the largest of BBR.bw and the probing rate, multiplied by BBR.rtt_min times BBRStartupCwndGain;

  • The "carefully-resuming" flag is reset to False two rounds after it is set, i.e., after all the packets sent in the first round of "carefully resuming" have been received and acknowledged by the peer. At that stage (after the capacity has been validated), the measured delivery rate is expected to reflect the probing rate.

Implementation notes are provided in Section 5.3.

3.4. Validating Phase

The Validating Phase checks that all packets sent in the Unvalidated Phase were received without inducing congestion. The CWND remains unvalidated and the sender typically remains in this phase for one RTT. On entry to the Validating Phase, the sender:

  • Validating Phase (Check flight_size on entry): On entry to the Validating Phase, if the flight_size is less equal to the PipeSize, the Normal Phase is entered with the CWND reset to the PipeSize. (The unvalidated part of the jump_cwnd was not utilised).

  • Validating Phase (Limiting CWND on entry): On entry to the Validating Phase, the CWND is set to the flight_size.

During the Validating Phase, the sender performs the following actions:

  • Validating Phase (Tracking PipeSize): The PipeSize is increased by the volume of acknowledged data for each received ACK that indicates a packet was successfully sent over the path.

  • Validating Phase (Updating CWND): The CWND is updated using the normal rules for the current congestion controller, this typically allows CWND to be increased for each received acknowledgement that indicates a packet has been successfully sent across the path.

  • Validating Phase (Congestion indication): If a sender determines that congestion was experienced (e.g., packet loss or ECN-CE marking), Careful Resume enters the Safe Retreat Phase (see trigger packet_loss and ECN_CE in Section 6).

  • Validating Phase (Receiving acknowledgement for all unvalidated packets): The sender enters the Normal Phase when an acknowledgement is received for the last packet number (or higher) that was sent in the Unvalidated Phase (see last_unvalidated_packet_acknowledged in Section 6).

When using BBR, validation is performed using the regular BBR rules for exiting Startup. The measured delivery rate will reflect the actual capacity of the network. If congestion was experienced and packet losses were observed, BBR will exit the Startup state and enter the Drain state while the "carefully-resuming" flag is still True, which will trigger the "safe retreat" option of the Drain state.

3.5. Safe Retreat Phase

This phase is entered when the first loss/ECN-CE marking is detected for an unvalidated packet. It drains the path of other unvalidated packets. (This trigger is the same as used by a QUIC sender to transition from Slow-Start to Recovery [RFC9002].)

On entry to the Safe Retreat Phase, the sender:

  • Safe Retreat Phase (Removing saved information): The set of saved CC parameters for the path are deleted, to prevent these from being used again by other flows.

  • Safe Retreat Phase (Re-initializing CWND): The CWND MUST be reduced to no more than (PipeSize/2). This avoids persistent starvation by allowing capacity for other flows to regain their share of the total capacity. The minimum CWND in QUIC is 2 packets (see: [RFC9002] section 4.8).

  • Safe Retreat Phase (QUIC recovery): When the CWND is reduced, a QUIC sender can immediately send a single packet prior to the reduction [RFC9002]. (This speeds up loss recovery if the data in the lost packet is retransmitted and is similar to TCP as described in Section 5 of [RFC6675].)

In the Safe Retreat Phase, the sender performs the following actions:

  • Safe Retreat Phase (Tracking PipeSize): The sender continues to update the PipeSize after processing each acknowledgement. (The PipeSize is used to reset the ssthresh when leaving this phase, it does not modify CWND.)

  • Safe Retreat Phase (Maintaining CWND): The CWND MUST NOT be increased in the Safe Retreat Phase.

  • Safe Retreat Phase (Acknowledgement of all unvalidated packets): The sender enters Normal Phase when the last packet (or a later packet) sent during the Unvalidated Phase has been acknowledged, and if required adjusts the ssthresh (see exit_recovery in Section 6). The value of ssthresh on leaving the Safe Retreat Phase MUST NOT be more than the PipeSize.

When using BBR, the Safe Retreat Phase is entered if the Drain state is entered while the "carefully-resuming" flag is still True, i.e., if less than 2 full rounds have elapsed after the sender entered the Unvalidated Phase. The delivery rates measured in these conditions are tainted, because packets sent during the attempt are still queued at the bottleneck and may have "pushed out" competing traffic. The delivery rates measured in Drain state MUST be discarded if the "carefully-resuming" flag is set to True. This flag is cleared upon exiting the Drain state.

Implementation notes are provided in Section 5.5.

3.5.1. Loss Recovery after entering Safe Retreat

Unacknowledged packets that were sent in the Unvalidated Phase can be lost when there is congestion. Loss recovery commences using the reduced CWND that was set on entry to the Safe Retreat Phase.

  • Loss Recovery (Receiving acknowledgement for all unvalidated packets): The sender leaves the Safe Retreat Phase when the last packet number (or a later packet) sent in the Unvalidated Phase is acknowledged. (Note that if the last packet number is not cumulatively acknowledged, then additional packets might need to be retransmitted.)

3.6. RTO Expiry while using Careful Resume

A sender that experiences a Retransmission Time Out (RTO) expiry ceases to use Careful Resume. The sender enters the Normal Phase. If using BBR, the normal processing of packet losses will cause it to enter the Drain state while the "carefully-resuming" flag is set to True, which will force the Safe Retreat mode.

As in loss recovery, data sent in the Unvalidated Phase could be later acknowledged after an RTO event (see Section 3.5.1).

3.7. Normal Phase

In the Normal Phase, the sender transitions to using the normal CC algorithm (e.g., in congestion avoidance if CWND is more than ssthresh). (Note that when the sender did not use the entire jump_cwnd the CWND was reduced on entering the Validating Phase.)

Implementation notes are provided in Section 5.6.

4. The Endpoint Token

The Endpoint Token is an implementation-dependent token that allows a sender to identify its own view of the network path being used to connect to a specific remote endpoint. This internal identifier is used by Careful Resume to match the current path with a set of CC parameters associated with a previously observed path.

4.1. Creating an Endpoint Token

When computing the Endpoint Token, the sender includes information to identify the path on which it sends, this needs to include:

  • a unique identifier for its own sending interface (e.g., a globally assigned address/prefix or other local identifier);

  • when multiple interfaces are in use, this unique identifier should include an interface identifier (e.g., an index value or a MAC address to associate the endpoint with the interface used for sending);

  • an identifier for the destination (e.g., a name or a destination IP address used to connect to the receiver);

The Endpoint Token could include other information such as the sender DSCP, the transport ports, a flow label, etc and other information (e.g., including PvD information [RFC8801] or information relating to its public-facing IP address). However, such additional information needs to be set consistently for a resumed connection to the same remote endpoint. Although additional information could improve the path differentiation, it could also reduce the re-usability of the token for resumed connections.

5. Implementation Notes and Guidelines

This section provides guidance for implementation and use.

5.1. Observing the Path Capacity

There are various approaches to measuring the capacity used by a connection. Congestion controllers, such as CUBIC or Reno, can estimate the capacity by utilizing the CWND or flight_size. A different approach could estimate the same parameters for a rate-based congestion controller, such as BBR [I-D.cardwell-iccrg-bbr-congestion-control], or by observing the rate at which data is acknowledged by the remote endpoint.

Implementations are required to calculate a saved_rtt, measuring the minimum RTT while observing the capacity. For example, this could be the minimum of a set RTT of measurements measured over the previous 5 minutes.

Implementations are expected to include a LifeTime parameter in the CC parameters that can be used to remove old CC parameters when no longer needed, or the CC parameters are out of date.

  • There are cases where the current CWND does not reflect the path capacity. At the end of slow start, the CWND can be significantly larger than needed to fully utilize the path (i.e., a CWND overshoot). It is inappropriate to use an overshoot in the CWND as a basis for estimating the capacity. In most cases, the CWND will converge to a stable value after several more RTTs. One mitigation could be to set the saved_cwnd based on the flight_size, or an averaged CWND.

  • When a sender is rate-limited, or in the RTT following a burst of transmission, a sender typically transmits less data than allowed by the CWND. Such observations could to be discounted when estimating the saved_cwnd (e.g., when a previous observation recorded a higher value.)

5.2. Confirming the Path in the Reconnaissance Phase

In the Reconnaissance Phase, a sender initiates a connection and starts sending initial data, while measuring the current_rtt. The CC is not modified. A sender therefore needs to limit the initial data, sent in the first RTT of transmitted data, to not more than the IW [RFC9000]. This transmission using the IW is assumed to be a safe starting point for any path to avoid adding excessive load to a potentially congested path.

Careful Resume does not permit multiple concurrent reuse of the saved CC parameters. When multiple new concurrent connections are made to a server, each can have a valid saved_endpoint_token, but the saved_cwnd can once (i.e., if two connections start simultaneously they cannot both use the saved_cwnd to perform a jump). This is to prevent a sender from performing multiple jumps in the CWND, each individually based on the same saved_cwnd, and hence creating an excessive aggregate load at the bottleneck.

The method that is used to prevent re-use of the saved CC parameters will depend upon the design of the server (e.g., if all connections from a given client IP arrive at the same server process, then the server process could use a hash table, whereas when using some types of load balancing, a distributed system might be needed to ensure this invariant when the load balancing hashes connections by 4-tuple and hence multiple connections from the same client device are served by different server processes.

5.2.1. Confirming the Path

Path characteristics can change over time for many reasons. This can result in the previously observed CC parameters becoming irrelevant.

To help confirm the path, the sender compares the saved_RTT with each of a series of current_rtt samples. If the current_rtt sample is less than a half of the saved_RTT, this is regarded as too small, and is an indicator of a path change. (This factor of two arises, because the rate should not exceed the observed rate when the saved_cwnd was measured, because the jump_cwnd is calculated as half the measured saved_cwnd.)

If the current RTT is larger than saved_rtt (when the saved_cwnd was measured), this results in a proportionally lower resumed rate, because the transmission using Careful Resume is paced based on the current_rtt (i.e., a larger RTT sample in the Unvalidated Phase would reduce the paced sending rate ,and hence is still safe). If the current_rtt is incorrectly measured as larger than the actual path RTT, the sender will receive an ACK for an unvalidated packet before it would have completed the Unvalidated Phase, Careful Resume uses this ACK to reset the CWND to reflect the flight_size, and the sender then enters the Validating Phase.

A current_rtt more than ten times the saved_RTT is indicative of a path change. (The value of ten was chosen to accommodate both increases in latency from buffering on a path, and any variation between RTT samples). A sender also verifies that the initial data was acknowledged. (i.e., both coukd otherwise could be indicative of persistent congestion).

A sender in Reconnaissance Phase reverts to the Normal Phase if congestion is detected. Some transport protocols implement CC mechanisms that infer potential congestion from an increase in the current_rtt. In the Reconnaissance Phase, this indication can occur earlier than congestion that is reported by loss or by ECN marking. Designs need to consider if such an indication is a suitable trigger to revert to the Normal Phase.

5.3. Safety for the Unvalidated Phase

This section considers the safety for using saved CC parameters to tentatively update the CWND. This is designed to mitigate the risk of adding excessive congestion to an already congested path.

A connection must not directly use the previously saved_cwnd to directly initialize a new flow causing it to resume sending at the same rate. The jump_cwnd must therefore be no more than half the previously saved_cwnd.

5.3.1. Lifetime of CC Parameters

The long-term use of the previously observed parameters is not appropriate, a lifetime therefore needs to be specified during which the saved CC parameters can be safely re-used.

[RFC9040] provides guidance on the implementation of TCP Control Block Interdependence, but does not specify how long a saved parameter can safely be reused.

[RFC7661] specifies a method for managing an unvalidated CWND. This states: "After a fixed period of time (the non-validated period (NVP)), the sender adjusts the cwnd (Section 4.4.3). The NVP SHOULD NOT exceed five minutes." Section 5 of [RFC7661] discusses the rationale for choosing that period. However, RFC 7661 targets rate-limited connections using normal CC. Careful Resume includes additional mechanisms to avoid and mitigate the effects of overshoot, and therefore this can be used to justify a longer lifetime of the saved_cwnd using Careful Resume.

5.3.2. Pacing in the Unvalidated Phase

A QUIC sender must avoid sending a burst of packets greater than IW as a result of a step-increase in the CWND. This is consistent with [RFC8085], [RFC9000].

Pacing packets as a function of the current_rtt, rather than the saved_RTT provides an additional safety during the Unvalidated Phase, because it avoids a smaller saved_RTT inflating the sending rate. Pacing also places a limitation on the minimum acceptable current_RTT to avoid sending at a rate higher than was previously observed.

The following example provides a relevant pacing rhythm using the RTT and the saved_cwnd. The Inter-packet Transmission Time (ITT) is determined by using the current Maximum Message Size (MMS), the saved_cwnd and the current_RTT. A safety margin can be configured to avoid sending more than a maximum (max_jump):

  • jump_cwnd = Min(max_jump,saved_cwnd/2)

  • ITT = (current_RTT x MMS)/jump_cwnd

This follows the idea presented in [RFC4782], [I-D.irtf-iccrg-sallantin-initial-spreading] and [CONEXT15]. Other sender mitigations have also been suggested to avoid line-rate bursts (e.g., [I-D.hughes-restart]).

5.3.3. Exit from the Unvalidated Phase because of Variable Network Conditions

  • Careful Resume has been designed to be robust to changes in network conditions due to variations in the forwarding path, such as reconfiguration of equipment, or changes in the link conditions. This is mitigated by path confirmation.

  • Careful Resume has been designed to be robust to changes in network traffic, including the arrival of new flows that compete for capacity at a shared bottleneck. This is mitigated by jumping to no more than a half of the saved_cwnd and by using pacing.

  • Careful Resume has been designed to avoid unduly suppressing flows that used the capacity since the available capacity was measured. This is further mitigated by bounding the duration of the Unvalidated Phase (and the following Validating Phase), and the conservative design of the Safe Retreat Phase.

5.4. The Validating Phase

The purpose of the Validating Phase is to trigger an entry to the Safe Retreat Phase if the capacity is not validated.

When a sender completes the Unvalidated Phase, either by sending a jump_cwnd of data or after one RTT, it ceases to use the unvalidated CWND. That is, CWND is reset to the flight_size, and the sender awaits reception of ACKs to validate the use of this capacity. New packets are sent when previously sent data is newly acknowledged. The CWND is increased during the Validating Phase, based on received ACKs. This allows new data to be sent, but this does not have any final impact on the CWND if congestion is subsequently detected.

5.5. Safety in the Safe Retreat Phase

This section considers the safety after congestion has been detected for unvalidated packets.

The Safe Retreat Phase sets a safe CWND value to drain any unvalidated packets from the path after a packet loss has been detected or ACKs that indicate sent packets were ECN CE-marked. The CC parameters that were used are invalid, and are removed.

The Safe Retreat reaction differs from a traditional reaction to detected congestion, because a jump_cwnd can result in a significantly higher rate than would be allowed by Slow-Start. This jump could aggressively feed a congested bottleneck, resulting in overshoot where a disproportionate number of packets from existing flows are displaced from the buffer at the congested bottleneck. For this reason, a sender in the Safe Retreat Phase needs to react to detected congestion by reducing CWND significantly below the saved_cwnd.

  • During loss recovery, a receiver can cumulatively acknowledge data that was previously sent in the Unvalidated Phase in addition to acknowledging successful retransmission of data. [RFC3465] describes how to appropriately account for such ACKs. ACKS received for unvalidated packets are tracked to measure the maximum available capacity, called the PipeSize (The first unvalidated packet can be determined by recording the sequence number of the first packet sent in the Unvalidated Phase.) This calculated PipeSize is later used to reset the ssthresh. However, note that this is not a safe measure of the currently available share of the capacity whenever there was also a significant overshoot at the bottleneck, and must not be used to reinitialise the CWND.

  • The Proportional Rate Reduction (PRR) [RFC6937] assumes that it is safe to reduce the rate gradually when in congestion avoidance. PRR is therefore not appropriate when there might be significant overshoot in the use of the capacity, which can be the case when the Safe Retreat Phase is entered.

  • The recovery from loss depends on the design of a transport protocol. A TCP or SCTP sender is required to retransmit all lost data [RFC5681]. For QUIC and DCCP, the need for loss recovery depends on the sender policy for retransmission. On entry to the Safe Retreat Phase, the CWND can be significantly reduced, when there was multiple loss, a sender recovering all lost data could take multiple RTTs to complete.

5.6. Returning to Normal Congestion Control

After using Careful Resume, the CC controller returns to the Normal Phase. The implementation details for different transports depend on the design of the transport. In the Normal Phase, a sender is permitted to start Observing the capacity of the path.

5.7. Limitations from Transport Protocols

The CWND is one factor that limits the sending rate of a sender. Other mechanisms can also constrain the maximum sending rate of a transport protocol. A transport protocol might need to update these mechanisms to fully utilise the CWND made available by Careful Resume:

  • A TCP sender is limited by the receiver window (rwnd). Unless configured at a receiver, the rwnd constrains the rate of increase for a connection and reduces the benefit of Careful Resume.

  • QUIC this includes flow control mechanisms and mechanisms to prevent amplification attacks. In particular, a QUIC receiver might need to issue proactive MAX_DATA frames to increase the flow control limits of a connection that is started when using Careful Resume to gain the expected benefit.

6. QLOG support for QUIC

This section provides definitions that enable a Careful Resume implementation to generate qlog events when using QUIC. It introduces an event to report the current phase of a sender, and an associated description.

The event and data structure definitions in this section are expressed in the Concise Data Definition Language (CDDL) [RFC8610] and its extensions described in [I-D.ietf-quic-qlog-quic-events]. The current convention is to use long names for variables. For example, "CWND" is expanded as "congestion_window" and "saved_cwnd" is expanded as "saved_congestion_window".

6.1. cr_phase Event

Importance: Extra

When the CC algorithm changes the Careful Resume Phase described in Section 3 of this specification.

Definition:

RecoveryCarefulResumePhaseUpdated = {
? old_phase: CarefulResumePhase,
new_phase: CarefulResumePhase,
state_data: CarefulResumeStateParameters,
? restored_data: CarefulResumeRestoredParameters,
? trigger:
        ; for the Unvalidated phase, when no unvalidated packets
        "congestion_window_limited" /
        ; for the Validating phase
        "first_unvalidated_packet_acknowledged" /
    ; for the Normal phase
    ; and no remaining unvalidated packets to be acknowledged
        "last_unvalidated_packet_acknowledged" /
        ; for the Normal phase, when CR not allowed
        "rtt_not_validated" /
        ; for the Normal phase,
        ; when sending fewer unvalidated packets than CWND permits
        "rate_limited" /
    ; for the Safe Retreat phase, when loss detected
        "packet_loss" /
    ; for the Safe Retreat phase,
    ; when ECN congestion experienced reported
        "ECN_CE" /
        ; for the Normal phase 1 RTT after a congestion event
        "exit_recovery"
}

CarefulResumePhase =
        "reconnaissance" /
        "unvalidated" /
        "validating" /
        "normal" /
        "safe_retreat"

CarefulResumeStateParameters = {
pipesize: uint,
first_unvalidated_packet: uint,
last_unvalidated_packet: uint,
? congestion_window: uint,
? ssthresh: uint
}

CarefulResumeRestoredParameters = {
saved_congestion_window: uint,
saved_rtt: float32
}
Figure 2

7. Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank John Border, Gabriel Montenegro, Patrick McManus, Ian Swett, Igor Lubashev, Robin Marx, Roland Bless, Franklin Simo, Kazuho Oku, Tong, Ana Custura, Neal Cardwell, and Joerg Deutschmann for their fruitful comments on earlier versions of this document.

The authors would like to particularly thank Tom Jones for co-authoring several previous versions of this document. Ana Custura and Robin Marx developed the qlog support.

8. IANA Considerations

No current parameters are required to be registered by IANA.

9. Security Considerations

This document does not exhibit specific security considerations. Security considerations for the interactions with the receiver are discussed in [I-D.kuhn-quic-bdpframe-extension].

10. References

10.1. Normative References

[RFC2119]
Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC8085]
Eggert, L., Fairhurst, G., and G. Shepherd, "UDP Usage Guidelines", BCP 145, RFC 8085, DOI 10.17487/RFC8085, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8085>.
[RFC8174]
Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC8610]
Birkholz, H., Vigano, C., and C. Bormann, "Concise Data Definition Language (CDDL): A Notational Convention to Express Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) and JSON Data Structures", RFC 8610, DOI 10.17487/RFC8610, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8610>.
[RFC8801]
Pfister, P., Vyncke, É., Pauly, T., Schinazi, D., and W. Shao, "Discovering Provisioning Domain Names and Data", RFC 8801, DOI 10.17487/RFC8801, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8801>.
[RFC9000]
Iyengar, J., Ed. and M. Thomson, Ed., "QUIC: A UDP-Based Multiplexed and Secure Transport", RFC 9000, DOI 10.17487/RFC9000, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9000>.

10.2. Informative References

[CONEXT15]
Li, Q., Dong, M., and P B. Godfrey, "Halfback: Running Short Flows Quickly and Safely", ACM CoNEXT , .
[I-D.cardwell-iccrg-bbr-congestion-control]
Cardwell, N., Cheng, Y., Yeganeh, S. H., Swett, I., and V. Jacobson, "BBR Congestion Control", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-cardwell-iccrg-bbr-congestion-control-02, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-cardwell-iccrg-bbr-congestion-control-02>.
[I-D.hughes-restart]
Hughes, A., Touch, J., and J. Heidemann, "Issues in TCP Slow-Start Restart After Idle", , Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-hughes-restart-00, , <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-hughes-restart-00.txt>.
[I-D.ietf-quic-qlog-quic-events]
Marx, R., Niccolini, L., Seemann, M., and L. Pardue, "QUIC event definitions for qlog", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-quic-qlog-quic-events-07, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-quic-qlog-quic-events-07>.
[I-D.irtf-iccrg-sallantin-initial-spreading]
Sallantin, R., Baudoin, C., Arnal, F., Dubois, E., Chaput, E., and A. Beylot, "Safe increase of the TCP's Initial Window Using Initial Spreading", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-irtf-iccrg-sallantin-initial-spreading-00, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-irtf-iccrg-sallantin-initial-spreading-00>.
[I-D.kuhn-quic-bdpframe-extension]
Kuhn, N., Emile, S., Fairhurst, G., Secchi, R., and C. Huitema, "Signalling CC Parameters for Careful Resume using QUIC", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-kuhn-quic-bdpframe-extension-05, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-kuhn-quic-bdpframe-extension-05>.
[IJSCN]
Thomas, L., Dubois, E., Kuhn, N., and E. Lochin, "Google QUIC performance over a public SATCOM access", International Journal of Satellite Communications and Networking 10.1002/sat.1301, .
[MAPRG111]
Kuhn, N., Stephan, E., Fairhurst, G., Jones, T., and C. Huitema, "Feedback from using QUIC's 0-RTT-BDP extension over SATCOM public access", IETF 111 - MAPRG meeting , .
[RFC3465]
Allman, M., "TCP Congestion Control with Appropriate Byte Counting (ABC)", RFC 3465, DOI 10.17487/RFC3465, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3465>.
[RFC4782]
Floyd, S., Allman, M., Jain, A., and P. Sarolahti, "Quick-Start for TCP and IP", RFC 4782, DOI 10.17487/RFC4782, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4782>.
[RFC5681]
Allman, M., Paxson, V., and E. Blanton, "TCP Congestion Control", RFC 5681, DOI 10.17487/RFC5681, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5681>.
[RFC5783]
Welzl, M. and W. Eddy, "Congestion Control in the RFC Series", RFC 5783, DOI 10.17487/RFC5783, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5783>.
[RFC6675]
Blanton, E., Allman, M., Wang, L., Jarvinen, I., Kojo, M., and Y. Nishida, "A Conservative Loss Recovery Algorithm Based on Selective Acknowledgment (SACK) for TCP", RFC 6675, DOI 10.17487/RFC6675, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6675>.
[RFC6937]
Mathis, M., Dukkipati, N., and Y. Cheng, "Proportional Rate Reduction for TCP", RFC 6937, DOI 10.17487/RFC6937, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6937>.
[RFC7661]
Fairhurst, G., Sathiaseelan, A., and R. Secchi, "Updating TCP to Support Rate-Limited Traffic", RFC 7661, DOI 10.17487/RFC7661, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7661>.
[RFC8867]
Sarker, Z., Singh, V., Zhu, X., and M. Ramalho, "Test Cases for Evaluating Congestion Control for Interactive Real-Time Media", RFC 8867, DOI 10.17487/RFC8867, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8867>.
[RFC9002]
Iyengar, J., Ed. and I. Swett, Ed., "QUIC Loss Detection and Congestion Control", RFC 9002, DOI 10.17487/RFC9002, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9002>.
[RFC9040]
Touch, J., Welzl, M., and S. Islam, "TCP Control Block Interdependence", RFC 9040, DOI 10.17487/RFC9040, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9040>.
[RFC9406]
Balasubramanian, P., Huang, Y., and M. Olson, "HyStart++: Modified Slow Start for TCP", RFC 9406, DOI 10.17487/RFC9406, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9406>.

Appendix A. Notes on the Careful Resume Phases

The table below is provided to illustrate the operation of Careful Resume. This table is informative, please refer to the body of the document for the normative specification. The description is based on a Normal CC that uses Reno or Cubic. The PipeSize tracks the validated CWND.

+------+---------+---------+------------+-----------+------------+
|Phase |Normal   |Recon.   |Unvalidated |Validating |Safe Retreat|
+------+---------+---------+------------+-----------+------------+
|      |Observing|Confirm  |Send faster |Validate   |Drain path; |
|      |CC params|path     |using saved |new CWND;  |Update PS   |
|      |         |         |_cwnd       |Update PS  |            |
+------+---------+---------+------------+-----------+------------+
|On    |    -    |CWND=IW  |PS=CWND;    |If (FS>PS) |CWND=(PS/2) |
|entry:|         |         |jump_cwnd   |{CWND=FS}  |            |
|      |         |         |=saved_cwnd |else       |            |
|      |         |         |/2;         |{CWND=PS;  |            |
|      |         |         |CWND        |enter      |
|      |         |         |=jump_cwnd  |Normal}    |            |
+------+---------+---------+------------+-----------+------------+
|CWND: |When in  |CWND     |CWND is not |CWND can   |CWND is not |
|      |observe, |increases|increased   |increase   |increased   |
|      |measure  |using SS |            |using SS   |            |
|      |saved    |         |            |           |            |
|      |_cwnd    |         |            |           |            |
+------+---------+---------+------------+-----------+------------+
|PS:   |    -    |    -    |              PS+=ACked              |
+------+---------+---------+------------+-----------+------------+
|RTT:  |Measure  |Measure  |      -     |     -     |      -     |
|      |saved_rtt|current  |            |           |            |
|      |         |_rtt     |            |           |            |
+------+---------+---------+------------+-----------+------------+
|If    |Normal   |Normal   |          Enter         |      -     |
|loss  |CC       |CC;      |          Safe          |            |
|or    |         |CR is not|          Retreat       |            |
|ECNCE:|         |allowed  |                        |            |
+------+---------+---------+------------+-----------+------------+
|Next  |Observing|If (     |If (FS=CWND |If (ACK    |If (ACK     |
|Phase:|(as      |FS=CWND, |or >1 RTT   |>= last    |>= last     |
|      |needed)  |Lifetime,|has passed  |unvalidated|unvalidated |
|      |         |and RTT  |or ACK for  |packet),   |packet),    |
|      |         |confirmed|>= last     |enter      |{ssthresh=PS|
|      |         |), enter |unvalidated |Normal     |and enter   |
|      |         |Unvalidat|packet),    |           |Normal}     |
|      |         |ing else |enter       |           |            |
|      |         |enter    |Validating  |           |            |
|      |         |Normal   |            |           |            |
+------+---------+---------+------------+-----------+------------+
Figure 3: Illustration of the operation of Careful Resume

The following abbreviations are used SS = Slow-Start FS = flight_size; PS = PipeSize; ACK = acknowledgement. The PipeSize tracks the validated part of the cwnd. It is set to the CWND on entry to the Unvalidated Phase and is updated as each additional packet is acknowledged.

Note: For an implementation that keeps track of transmitted data in terms of packets: In the Unvalidated Phase, the first unvalidated packet corresponds to the highest sent packet recorded on entry to this phase. In the Validating Phase and Safe Retreat Phase, this corresponds to the last unvalidated packet. It is also the highest sent packet number recorded on entry to this phase.

The remaining subsections provide informative examples of use.

Note: Although the QLOG variables are expressed in bytes, to simplify the description, these examples are described in term of packet numbers.

A.1. Example with No Loss

In the first example of using Careful Resume, the sender starts by sending IW packets, assumed to be 10 packets, in the Reconnaissance Phase, and then continues in a subsequent RTT to send more packets until the sender becomes CWND-limited (i.e., flight_size = CWND).

The sender in the Reconaissance Phase then confirms the RTT and other conditions for using Careful Resume. In this example, this is confirmed when the sender has 29 packets in flight.

The sender then enters the Unvalidated Phase. (This path confirmation could have happened earlier if data had been available to send.) The sender initialises the PipeSize to the CWND (at this time this is the same as the flight_size, i.e., 29 packets) and then sets the CWND to 150 packets (based upon half of the previously observed saved_cwnd of 300 packets).

The sender now sends 121 unvalidated packets (the unused portion of the current CWND). Each time a packet is sent, the sender checks whether 1 RTT has passed since entering the Unvalidated Phase (otherwise, the Validating Phase is entered). This check triggers only for cases where the sender is rate-limited, see the following example.

The PipeSize increases after each ACK is received.

When the first unvalidated packet is acknowledged (packet number 30) the sender enters the Validating Phase. (This transition would also occur if the flight_size increased to equal CWND.) During this phase, the CWND can be increased for each ACK that acknowledges an unvalidated packet, because this indicates that the packet was indeed validated.

When an ACK is received for the last packet that was sent in the Unvalidated Phase, the sender completes using Careful Resume. It then enters the Normal Phase. If CWND is less than ssthresh, a Reno or Cubic sender in the Normal Phase is permitted to use Slow-Start to grow the CWND towards the ssthresh, and will then enter congestion avoidance.

A.2. Example with No Loss, Rate-Limited

A rate-limited sender will not fully utilize the available CWND when using Careful Resume, and CWND is therefore reset on entry to the Validating Phase, as described below.

The sender starts by sending IW packets (10) in the Reconnaissance Phase. It commences as described in the first example, transitioning to the Unvalidated Phase. This sets the CWND to 150 packets, and the PipeSize to the flight_size (i.e., 29 packets).

The sender then becomes rate-limited because it only sends 50 unvalidated packets.

After about one RTT (detected by using local timestamps or by receiving an ACK for the first unvalidated packet), the sender will still not have fully used the CWND. It then enters the Validating Phase and resets the CWND to the current flight_size, (i.e., 50 packets). During this phase, the CWND can be increased for each received ACK that validates reception of an unvalidated packet. The PipeSize also increases with each ACK received, to reflect the discovered capacity.

When an ACK is received for the last packet sent in the Unvalidated Phase, the sender has completed using Careful Resume. It then enters the Normal Phase, as in the example with no loss.

A.3. Example with Loss detected in the Reconnaissance Phase

When a packet is lost in the Reconnaissance Phase, the sender will enter the Normal Phase and recovers this using the normal method. (There is no change to the CC method, because the sender has discovered a potential capacity limit and is not allowed to continue to use Careful Resume.)

A.4. Example with Loss detected in the Validating Phase

As in the first example, the sender enters the Unvalidated Phase and sets the CWND to 150 packets with the PipeSize initialized to the flight_size (i.e., 29 packets).

The sender now sends 121 unvalidated packets (the remaining unused CWND). This example considers the case when one of the unvalidated packet is lost, which we choose to be packet 64 (the 35th packet sent in the Unvalidated Phase).

ACKs confirm the first 34 unvalidated packets are received without loss. The PipeSize at this point is equal to 63 (29 + 34) packets.

The loss is then detected (by a timer or by receiving three ACKs that do not cover packet number 35), the sender then enters the Safe Retreat Phase because the window was not validated. The PipeSize at this point is equal to 66 (29 + 34) packets. Assuming that the IW was 10 packets, the CWND is reset to Max(10,PS/2) = Max(10,66/2) = 33 packets. This CWND is used during the Safe Retreat Phase, because congestion was detected and the sender still does not yet know if the remaining unvalidated packets will be successfully acknowledged. A conservative CWND calculation ensures the sender drains the path after this potentially severe congestion event. There is no further increase in CWND in this phase.

The sender continues to receive ACKs for the remaining 86 (121-35) unvalidated packets. Recall that the 35th unvalidated packet was lost and had packet number 64 (29+35). The PipeSize tracks the capacity discovered by acknowledgments for the unvalidated packets and continues to be further increased for each received ACK acknowledges new data. Although the PipeSize cannot be used to safety initialise the CWND (because it was measured when the sender had aggressively created overload), the estimated PipeSize (which, in this case, is 121-1 = 120 packets) can be used to set the ssthresh on exit from Safe Retreat, since it does indicate an upper limit to the current capacity.

At the point where all packets sent in the Unvalidated Phase have been either acknowledged or have been declared lost, the sender updates ssthresh and enters the Normal Phase. Because CWND will now now be less than ssthresh, a sender in the Normal Phase is permitted to use Slow-Start to grow the CWND towards the ssthresh, after which it will enter congestion avoidance.

Appendix B. Internet Draft Revision details

Previous individual submissions were discussed in TSVWG and QUIC.

Authors' Addresses

Nicolas Kuhn
Thales Alenia Space
Emile Stephan
Orange
Godred Fairhurst
University of Aberdeen
Department of Engineering
Fraser Noble Building
Aberdeen
AB24 3UE
United Kingdom
Raffaello Secchi
University of Aberdeen
Department of Engineering
Fraser Noble Building
Aberdeen
AB24 3UE
United Kingdom
Christian Huitema
Private Octopus Inc.