Bug 1852924 Comment 36 Edit History

Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.

Thanks for the log. It is really helpful to see the networking condition. This is what I gathered using [my log visualizer](https://github.com/mb/scripts/blob/39f3e62935ca32d6fc07f387e60ca0eda3b94274/visualize/mozlog-neqo-cwnd.py).

1. In this network log all detected packet losses were really lost packets. No spurious retransmission were recorded, so in this network condition [RACK](https://github.com/mozilla/neqo/pull/1486) wouldn't improve upload speed.
2. We do see time a frames with 300ms frame. That is tracked in [neqo #1474](https://github.com/mozilla/neqo/issues/1474).
3. The second drop in packets is more interesting, because it more than 1s and it fails to recover bytes_in_flight back to the congestion window, but might still be the same bug ([neqo #1474](https://github.com/mozilla/neqo/issues/1474)). This might be due to other websites/connections affecting h3 upload.
4. We don't send packets fast enough, that is tracked in [neqo #1483](https://github.com/mozilla/neqo/issues/1483), but [neqo #1487](https://github.com/mozilla/neqo/issues/1487) could also be a positive impact with not too much effort.

I think focusing on [neqo #1487](https://github.com/mozilla/neqo/issues/1487) first is good, because it is actionable. We saw that in other networking conditions [RACK](https://github.com/mozilla/neqo/pull/1486) is really helpful, so I would tackle that afterwards. And the other two issues should also be looked at :).
Thanks for the log. It is really helpful to see the networking condition. This is what I gathered using [my log visualizer](https://github.com/mb/scripts/blob/39f3e62935ca32d6fc07f387e60ca0eda3b94274/visualize/mozlog-neqo-cwnd.py).

1. In this network log all detected packet losses were really lost packets. No spurious retransmission were recorded, so in this network condition [RACK](https://github.com/mozilla/neqo/pull/1486) wouldn't improve upload speed.
2. We do see a time frame of 300ms without sending packets. That is tracked in [neqo #1474](https://github.com/mozilla/neqo/issues/1474).
3. The second drop in packets is more interesting, because it more than 1s and it fails to recover bytes_in_flight back to the congestion window, but might still be the same bug ([neqo #1474](https://github.com/mozilla/neqo/issues/1474)). This might be due to other websites/connections affecting h3 upload.
4. We don't send packets fast enough, that is tracked in [neqo #1483](https://github.com/mozilla/neqo/issues/1483), but [neqo #1487](https://github.com/mozilla/neqo/issues/1487) could also be a positive impact with not too much effort.

I think focusing on [neqo #1487](https://github.com/mozilla/neqo/issues/1487) first is good, because it is actionable. We saw that in other networking conditions [RACK](https://github.com/mozilla/neqo/pull/1486) is really helpful, so I would tackle that afterwards. And the other two issues should also be looked at :).

Back to Bug 1852924 Comment 36