draft-ietf-rmcat-nada-09.txt   draft-ietf-rmcat-nada-10.txt 
Network Working Group X. Zhu Network Working Group X. Zhu
Internet-Draft R. Pan Internet-Draft R. Pan
Intended status: Experimental M. Ramalho Intended status: Experimental M. Ramalho
Expires: February 4, 2019 S. Mena Expires: August 7, 2019 S. Mena
P. Jones P. Jones
J. Fu J. Fu
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
S. D'Aronco S. D'Aronco
EPFL EPFL
August 3, 2018 February 3, 2019
NADA: A Unified Congestion Control Scheme for Real-Time Media NADA: A Unified Congestion Control Scheme for Real-Time Media
draft-ietf-rmcat-nada-09 draft-ietf-rmcat-nada-10
Abstract Abstract
This document describes NADA (network-assisted dynamic adaptation), a This document describes NADA (network-assisted dynamic adaptation), a
novel congestion control scheme for interactive real-time media novel congestion control scheme for interactive real-time media
applications, such as video conferencing. In the proposed scheme, applications, such as video conferencing. In the proposed scheme,
the sender regulates its sending rate based on either implicit or the sender regulates its sending rate based on either implicit or
explicit congestion signaling, in a unified approach. The scheme can explicit congestion signaling, in a unified approach. The scheme can
benefit from explicit congestion notification (ECN) markings from benefit from explicit congestion notification (ECN) markings from
network nodes. It also maintains consistent sender behavior in the network nodes. It also maintains consistent sender behavior in the
skipping to change at page 1, line 44 skipping to change at page 1, line 44
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on February 4, 2019. This Internet-Draft will expire on August 7, 2019.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
skipping to change at page 2, line 48 skipping to change at page 2, line 48
6. Discussions and Further Investigations . . . . . . . . . . . 17 6. Discussions and Further Investigations . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.1. Choice of delay metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 6.1. Choice of delay metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.2. Method for delay, loss, and marking ratio estimation . . 18 6.2. Method for delay, loss, and marking ratio estimation . . 18
6.3. Impact of parameter values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 6.3. Impact of parameter values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
6.4. Sender-based vs. receiver-based calculation . . . . . . . 19 6.4. Sender-based vs. receiver-based calculation . . . . . . . 19
6.5. Incremental deployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 6.5. Incremental deployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
7. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 7. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
8. Suggested Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 8. Suggested Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
11. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 11. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Appendix A. Network Node Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Appendix A. Network Node Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
A.1. Default behavior of drop tail queues . . . . . . . . . . 24 A.1. Default behavior of drop tail queues . . . . . . . . . . 24
A.2. RED-based ECN marking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 A.2. RED-based ECN marking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
A.3. Random Early Marking with Virtual Queues . . . . . . . . 25 A.3. Random Early Marking with Virtual Queues . . . . . . . . 25
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
skipping to change at page 6, line 19 skipping to change at page 6, line 19
| t_last | Last time sending/receiving a feedback | | t_last | Last time sending/receiving a feedback |
| delta | Observed interval between current and previous | | delta | Observed interval between current and previous |
| | feedback reports: delta = t_curr-t_last | | | feedback reports: delta = t_curr-t_last |
| r_ref | Reference rate based on network congestion | | r_ref | Reference rate based on network congestion |
| r_send | Sending rate | | r_send | Sending rate |
| r_recv | Receiving rate | | r_recv | Receiving rate |
| r_vin | Target rate for video encoder | | r_vin | Target rate for video encoder |
| r_vout | Output rate from video encoder | | r_vout | Output rate from video encoder |
| d_base | Estimated baseline delay | | d_base | Estimated baseline delay |
| d_fwd | Measured and filtered one-way delay | | d_fwd | Measured and filtered one-way delay |
| d_queue | Estimated queueing delay | | d_queue | Estimated queuing delay |
| d_tilde | Equivalent delay after non-linear warping | | d_tilde | Equivalent delay after non-linear warping |
| p_mark | Estimated packet ECN marking ratio | | p_mark | Estimated packet ECN marking ratio |
| p_loss | Estimated packet loss ratio | | p_loss | Estimated packet loss ratio |
| x_curr | Aggregate congestion signal | | x_curr | Aggregate congestion signal |
| x_prev | Previous value of aggregate congestion signal | | x_prev | Previous value of aggregate congestion signal |
| x_diff | Change in aggregate congestion signal w.r.t. | | x_diff | Change in aggregate congestion signal w.r.t. |
| | its previous value: x_diff = x_curr - x_prev | | | its previous value: x_diff = x_curr - x_prev |
| rmode | Rate update mode: (0 = accelerated ramp-up; | | rmode | Rate update mode: (0 = accelerated ramp-up; |
| | 1 = gradual update) | | | 1 = gradual update) |
| gamma | Rate increase multiplier in accelerated ramp-up | | gamma | Rate increase multiplier in accelerated ramp-up |
skipping to change at page 21, line 23 skipping to change at page 21, line 23
slide shows). slide shows).
9. IANA Considerations 9. IANA Considerations
This document makes no request of IANA. This document makes no request of IANA.
10. Security Considerations 10. Security Considerations
TBD TBD
11. Acknowledgements 11. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Randell Jesup, Luca De Cicco, Piers The authors would like to thank Randell Jesup, Luca De Cicco, Piers
O'Hanlon, Ingemar Johansson, Stefan Holmer, Cesar Ilharco Magalhaes, O'Hanlon, Ingemar Johansson, Stefan Holmer, Cesar Ilharco Magalhaes,
Safiqul Islam, Michael Welzl, Mirja Kuhlewind, Karen Elisabeth Egede Safiqul Islam, Michael Welzl, Mirja Kuhlewind, Karen Elisabeth Egede
Nielsen, Julius Flohr, Roland Bless, and Andreas Smas for their Nielsen, Julius Flohr, Roland Bless, Andreas Smas, and Martin
various valuable review comments and feedback. Thanks to Charles Stiemerling for their various valuable review comments and feedback.
Ganzhorn for contributing to the testbed-based evaluation of NADA Thanks to Charles Ganzhorn for contributing to the testbed-based
during an early stage of its development. evaluation of NADA during an early stage of its development.
12. References 12. References
12.1. Normative References 12.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
skipping to change at page 22, line 47 skipping to change at page 22, line 47
(work in progress), March 2016. (work in progress), March 2016.
[I-D.ietf-rmcat-cc-requirements] [I-D.ietf-rmcat-cc-requirements]
Jesup, R. and Z. Sarker, "Congestion Control Requirements Jesup, R. and Z. Sarker, "Congestion Control Requirements
for Interactive Real-Time Media", draft-ietf-rmcat-cc- for Interactive Real-Time Media", draft-ietf-rmcat-cc-
requirements-09 (work in progress), December 2014. requirements-09 (work in progress), December 2014.
[I-D.ietf-rmcat-eval-test] [I-D.ietf-rmcat-eval-test]
Sarker, Z., Singh, V., Zhu, X., and M. Ramalho, "Test Sarker, Z., Singh, V., Zhu, X., and M. Ramalho, "Test
Cases for Evaluating RMCAT Proposals", draft-ietf-rmcat- Cases for Evaluating RMCAT Proposals", draft-ietf-rmcat-
eval-test-06 (work in progress), June 2018. eval-test-08 (work in progress), November 2018.
[I-D.ietf-rmcat-video-traffic-model] [I-D.ietf-rmcat-video-traffic-model]
Zhu, X., Cruz, S., and Z. Sarker, "Video Traffic Models Zhu, X., Cruz, S., and Z. Sarker, "Video Traffic Models
for RTP Congestion Control Evaluations", draft-ietf-rmcat- for RTP Congestion Control Evaluations", draft-ietf-rmcat-
video-traffic-model-05 (work in progress), July 2018. video-traffic-model-06 (work in progress), November 2018.
[I-D.ietf-rmcat-wireless-tests] [I-D.ietf-rmcat-wireless-tests]
Sarker, Z., Johansson, I., Zhu, X., Fu, J., Tan, W., and Sarker, Z., Johansson, I., Zhu, X., Fu, J., Tan, W., and
M. Ramalho, "Evaluation Test Cases for Interactive Real- M. Ramalho, "Evaluation Test Cases for Interactive Real-
Time Media over Wireless Networks", draft-ietf-rmcat- Time Media over Wireless Networks", draft-ietf-rmcat-
wireless-tests-05 (work in progress), June 2018. wireless-tests-06 (work in progress), December 2018.
[IETF-90] Zhu, X., Ramalho, M., Ganzhorn, C., Jones, P., and R. Pan, [IETF-90] Zhu, X., Ramalho, M., Ganzhorn, C., Jones, P., and R. Pan,
"NADA Update: Algorithm, Implementation, and Test Case "NADA Update: Algorithm, Implementation, and Test Case
Evalua6on Results", July 2014, Evalua6on Results", July 2014,
<https://tools.ietf.org/agenda/90/slides/ <https://tools.ietf.org/agenda/90/slides/
slides-90-rmcat-6.pdf>. slides-90-rmcat-6.pdf>.
[IETF-91] Zhu, X., Pan, R., Ramalho, M., Mena, S., Ganzhorn, C., [IETF-91] Zhu, X., Pan, R., Ramalho, M., Mena, S., Ganzhorn, C.,
Jones, P., and S. D'Aronco, "NADA Algorithm Update and Jones, P., and S. D'Aronco, "NADA Algorithm Update and
Test Case Evaluations", November 2014, Test Case Evaluations", November 2014,
 End of changes. 12 change blocks. 
15 lines changed or deleted 15 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/