draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-experimentation-00.txt   draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-experimentation-01.txt 
Transport Area Working Group D. Black Transport Area Working Group D. Black
Internet-Draft Dell EMC Internet-Draft Dell EMC
Obsoletes: 3540 (if approved) December 15, 2016 Obsoletes: 3540 (if approved) March 8, 2017
Updates: 3168, 4341, 4342, 5622, 6679 Updates: 3168, 4341, 4342, 5622, 6679
(if approved) (if approved)
Intended status: Standards Track Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: June 18, 2017 Expires: September 9, 2017
Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) Experimentation Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) Experimentation
draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-experimentation-00 draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-experimentation-01
Abstract Abstract
Multiple protocol experiments have been proposed that involve changes Multiple protocol experiments have been proposed that involve changes
to Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) as specified in RFC 3168. to Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) as specified in RFC 3168.
This memo summarizes the proposed areas of experimentation to provide This memo summarizes the proposed areas of experimentation to provide
an overview to the Internet community and updates RFC 3168, a an overview to the Internet community and updates RFC 3168, a
Proposed Standard RFC, to allow the experiments to proceed without Proposed Standard RFC, to allow the experiments to proceed without
requiring a standards process exception for each Experimental RFC to requiring a standards process exception for each Experimental RFC to
update RFC 3168. Each experiment is still required to be documented update RFC 3168. Each experiment is still required to be documented
skipping to change at page 1, line 45 skipping to change at page 1, line 45
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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://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 June 18, 2017. This Internet-Draft will expire on September 9, 2017.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2017 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
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://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 51 skipping to change at page 2, line 51
4.3. Generalized ECN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4.3. Generalized ECN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.4. Effective Congestion Control is Required . . . . . . . . 8 4.4. Effective Congestion Control is Required . . . . . . . . 8
5. ECN for RTP Updates to RFC 6679 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5. ECN for RTP Updates to RFC 6679 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6. ECN for DCCP Updates to RFCs 4341, 4342 and 5622 . . . . . . 10 6. ECN for DCCP Updates to RFCs 4341, 4342 and 5622 . . . . . . 10
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Multiple protocol experiments have been proposed that involve changes Multiple protocol experiments have been proposed that involve changes
to Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) as specified in RFC 3168 to Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) as specified in RFC 3168
[RFC3168]. This memo summarizes the proposed areas of [RFC3168]. This memo summarizes the proposed areas of
experimentation to provide an overview to the Internet community and experimentation to provide an overview to the Internet community and
updates RFC 3168 to allow the experiments to proceed without updates RFC 3168 to allow the experiments to proceed without
requiring a standards process exception for each Experimental RFC to requiring a standards process exception for each Experimental RFC to
update RFC 3168, a Proposed Standard RFC. This memo also makes update RFC 3168, a Proposed Standard RFC. This memo also makes
skipping to change at page 4, line 17 skipping to change at page 4, line 17
traffic not receive different treatment in the network. traffic not receive different treatment in the network.
Generalized ECN: Use ECN for TCP control packets (i.e., send control Generalized ECN: Use ECN for TCP control packets (i.e., send control
packets such as SYN with ECT marking) and for retransmitted packets such as SYN with ECT marking) and for retransmitted
packets, e.g., as proposed in [I-D.bagnulo-tsvwg-generalized-ecn]. packets, e.g., as proposed in [I-D.bagnulo-tsvwg-generalized-ecn].
This is at variance with RFC 3168's prohibition of use of ECN for This is at variance with RFC 3168's prohibition of use of ECN for
TCP control packets and retransmitted packets TCP control packets and retransmitted packets
The scope of this memo is limited to these three areas of The scope of this memo is limited to these three areas of
experimentation. This memo neither prejudges the outcomes of the experimentation. This memo neither prejudges the outcomes of the
proposed experiments nor specifies the experiments in detail. The proposed experiments nor specifies the experiments in detail.
purpose of this memo is to remove constraints in standards track RFCs Additional experiments in these areas are possible, e.g., on use of
that serve to prohibit these areas of experimentation. ECN to support deployment of Datacenter TCP (DCTCP)
[I-D.ietf-tcpm-dctcp] beyond its current applicablity limitation to
data center environments. The purpose of this memo is to remove
constraints in standards track RFCs that serve to prohibit these
areas of experimentation.
3. ECN Nonce and RFC 3540 3. ECN Nonce and RFC 3540
As specified in RFC 3168, ECN uses two ECN Capable Transport (ECT) As specified in RFC 3168, ECN uses two ECN Capable Transport (ECT)
codepoints to indicate that a packet supports ECN, ECT(0) and ECT(1), codepoints to indicate that a packet supports ECN, ECT(0) and ECT(1),
with the second codepoint used to support ECN nonce functionality to with the second codepoint used to support ECN nonce functionality to
discourage receivers from exploiting ECN to improve their throughput discourage receivers from exploiting ECN to improve their throughput
at the expense of other network users, as specified in experimental at the expense of other network users, as specified in experimental
RFC 3540 [RFC3540]. RFC 3540 [RFC3540].
skipping to change at page 11, line 9 skipping to change at page 11, line 9
3168 that are updated draws heavily from 3168 that are updated draws heavily from
[I-D.khademi-tsvwg-ecn-response], whose authors are gratefully [I-D.khademi-tsvwg-ecn-response], whose authors are gratefully
acknowledged. The authors of the Internet Drafts describing the acknowledged. The authors of the Internet Drafts describing the
experiments have motivated the production of this memo - their experiments have motivated the production of this memo - their
interest in innovation is welcome and heartily acknowledged. Colin interest in innovation is welcome and heartily acknowledged. Colin
Perkins suggested updating RFC 6679 on RTP and provided guidance on Perkins suggested updating RFC 6679 on RTP and provided guidance on
where to make the updates. where to make the updates.
The draft has been improved as a result of comments from a number of The draft has been improved as a result of comments from a number of
reviewers, including Spencer Dawkins, Gorry Fairhurst, Ingemar reviewers, including Spencer Dawkins, Gorry Fairhurst, Ingemar
Johansson, Naeem Khademi, Mirja Kuehlewind and Michael Welzl. Bob Johansson, Naeem Khademi, Mirja Kuehlewind, Karen Nielsen and Michael
Briscoe's thorough review of an early version of this draft resulted Welzl. Bob Briscoe's thorough review of an early version of this
in numerous improvments including addition of the updates to the DCCP draft resulted in numerous improvments including addition of the
RFCs. updates to the DCCP RFCs.
8. IANA Considerations 8. IANA Considerations
This memo includes no request to IANA. This memo includes no request to IANA.
9. Security Considerations 9. Security Considerations
As a process memo that makes no changes to existing protocols, there As a process memo that makes no changes to existing protocols, there
are no protocol security considerations. are no protocol security considerations.
skipping to change at page 12, line 45 skipping to change at page 12, line 45
Bagnulo, M. and B. Briscoe, "Adding Explicit Congestion Bagnulo, M. and B. Briscoe, "Adding Explicit Congestion
Notification (ECN) to TCP control packets", draft-bagnulo- Notification (ECN) to TCP control packets", draft-bagnulo-
tsvwg-generalized-ecn-01 (work in progress), July 2016. tsvwg-generalized-ecn-01 (work in progress), July 2016.
[I-D.briscoe-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id] [I-D.briscoe-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id]
Schepper, K., Briscoe, B., and I. Tsang, "Identifying Schepper, K., Briscoe, B., and I. Tsang, "Identifying
Modified Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) Semantics Modified Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) Semantics
for Ultra-Low Queuing Delay", draft-briscoe-tsvwg-ecn-l4s- for Ultra-Low Queuing Delay", draft-briscoe-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-
id-02 (work in progress), October 2016. id-02 (work in progress), October 2016.
[I-D.ietf-tcpm-dctcp]
Bensley, S., Eggert, L., Thaler, D., Balasubramanian, P.,
and G. Judd, "Datacenter TCP (DCTCP): TCP Congestion
Control for Datacenters", draft-ietf-tcpm-dctcp-04 (work
in progress), February 2017.
[I-D.khademi-tcpm-alternativebackoff-ecn] [I-D.khademi-tcpm-alternativebackoff-ecn]
Khademi, N., Welzl, M., Armitage, G., and G. Fairhurst, Khademi, N., Welzl, M., Armitage, G., and G. Fairhurst,
"TCP Alternative Backoff with ECN (ABE)", draft-khademi- "TCP Alternative Backoff with ECN (ABE)", draft-khademi-
tcpm-alternativebackoff-ecn-01 (work in progress), October tcpm-alternativebackoff-ecn-01 (work in progress), October
2016. 2016.
[I-D.khademi-tsvwg-ecn-response] [I-D.khademi-tsvwg-ecn-response]
Khademi, N., Welzl, M., Armitage, G., and G. Fairhurst, Khademi, N., Welzl, M., Armitage, G., and G. Fairhurst,
"Updating the Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) "Updating the Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN)
Specification to Allow IETF Experimentation", draft- Specification to Allow IETF Experimentation", draft-
skipping to change at page 14, line 41 skipping to change at page 14, line 45
changes to Section 4.2. changes to Section 4.2.
o Clean up and tighten language requiring all congestion responses o Clean up and tighten language requiring all congestion responses
to be IETF-approved to be IETF-approved
o Additional editorial changes. o Additional editorial changes.
Initial WG draft, draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-experimentation-00, has same Initial WG draft, draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-experimentation-00, has same
contents as draft-black-tsvwg-ecn-experimentation-04. contents as draft-black-tsvwg-ecn-experimentation-04.
Changes from draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-experimentation-00 to -01:
o Add mention of DCTCP as another protocol that could benefit from
ECN experimentation (near end of Section 2).
Author's Address Author's Address
David Black David Black
Dell EMC Dell EMC
176 South Street 176 South Street
Hopkinton, MA 01748 Hopkinton, MA 01748
USA USA
Email: david.black@dell.com Email: david.black@dell.com
 End of changes. 10 change blocks. 
13 lines changed or deleted 28 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.45. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/