Skip to content

Conversation

@philipch07
Copy link
Contributor

Description

According to https://duepublico2.uni-due.de/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/duepublico_derivate_00073893/Diss_Weinrank.pdf#page=113 section 7.3.2, an enhancement for RACK in SCTP is to add active RTT measurement.

This branch adds that feature. Note that it's built on the RACK branch merged with the adaptive burst mitigation branch.

The best thing to add after this would be the I bit as mentioned in 7.3.4 which is formalized in RFC 9260. That's something that will take place after all the 9260 prs go in, as it involves updating Association.go which really needs a refactor since it's way too unwieldy...

Reference issue

A RACK enhancement!

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 24, 2025

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 80.09119% with 131 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 84.32%. Comparing base (b1a66a4) to head (8f1aa04).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
association.go 79.08% 86 Missing and 33 partials ⚠️
chunk_heartbeat_ack.go 71.42% 4 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
chunk_heartbeat.go 85.18% 2 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #438      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   83.74%   84.32%   +0.58%     
==========================================
  Files          51       52       +1     
  Lines        4527     4032     -495     
==========================================
- Hits         3791     3400     -391     
+ Misses        597      450     -147     
- Partials      139      182      +43     
Flag Coverage Δ
go 84.32% <80.09%> (+0.58%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants