Robin's latest email somehow got stuck in moderator purgatory and was
actually supposed to have been sent on November 10. I expect it is stale
now after the conversation continued.

On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 1:41 AM Robin Marx <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hello Damien,
>
> Thank you for bringing this to our attention.
> I agree you have a point and have to admit that, at first, I was confused,
> because I thought we already defaulted to logging the wire image/unscaled
> value instead of the scaled one.
>
> As such, I think your suggestion is a sensible one and I've created a PR
> for it here: https://github.com/quicwg/qlog/pull/337
> Feel free to comment more on that issue as well.
>
> In absence of protest by others, this will be in the next draft versions.
>
> With best regards,
> Robin
>
> On Thu, Nov 9, 2023 at 10:44 PM Damien Neil <dneil=
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> The qlog AckFrame type includes the ack delay as a float32 number of
>> milliseconds:
>>
>> AckFrame = {
>>     frame_type: "ack"
>>
>>     ; in ms
>>     ? ack_delay: float32
>>     ; ...
>> }
>>
>>
>> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-quic-qlog-quic-events-06.html#section-8.12.3
>>
>> Given a serialized ack frame, determining the delay as a duration
>> requires knowing the ack_delay_exponent. In some cases, the logging
>> endpoint may not have this available (if receiving an ack before transport
>> parameters have been received). Even when available, it may not be easily
>> accessible at the point of logging. For example, in my own implementation,
>> I'd like to be able to convert a packet payload to a series of qlog event
>> frames without needing to reference persistent connection state.
>>
>> I think there should be an alternative to log the raw value of the ACK
>> Delay field:
>>
>> AckFrame = {
>>     frame_type: "ack"
>>
>>     ; in ms
>>     ? ack_delay: float32
>>
>>     ; integer value of the ACK Delay field, not scaled by the
>> ack_delay_exponent
>>     ? unscaled_ack_delay: uint64
>>
>>     ; ...
>> }
>>
>> - Damien
>>
>
>
> --
> Marx Robin
> +32 (0)497 72 86 94
>

Reply via email to