draft-ietf-manet-dlep-da-credit-extension-05.txt		draft-ietf-manet-dlep-da-credit-extension-06.txt
	Network Working Group B. Cheng		Network Working Group B. Cheng
	Internet-Draft D. Wiggins		Internet-Draft D. Wiggins
	Intended status: Standards Track Lincoln Laboratory		Intended status: Standards Track MIT Lincoln Laboratory
	Expires: November 2, 2018 L. Berger		Expires: February 3, 2019 L. Berger
	LabN Consulting, L.L.C.		LabN Consulting, L.L.C.
	May 1, 2018		August 2, 2018
	DLEP DiffServ Aware Credit Window Extension		DLEP DiffServ Aware Credit Window Extension
	draft-ietf-manet-dlep-da-credit-extension-05		draft-ietf-manet-dlep-da-credit-extension-06
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document defines an extension to the DLEP protocol that enables		This document defines an extension to the DLEP protocol that enables
	a DiffServ aware credit-window scheme for destination-specific and		a DiffServ aware credit-window scheme for destination-specific and
	shared flow control.		shared flow control.
	Status of This Memo		Status of This Memo
	This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the		This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
	skipping to change at page 1, line 34 ¶		skipping to change at page 1, line 34 ¶
	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 November 2, 2018.		This Internet-Draft will expire on February 3, 2019.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2018 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
	skipping to change at page 2, line 30 ¶		skipping to change at page 2, line 30 ¶
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	The Dynamic Link Exchange Protocol (DLEP) is defined in [RFC8175].		The Dynamic Link Exchange Protocol (DLEP) is defined in [RFC8175].
	It provides the exchange of link related control information between		It provides the exchange of link related control information between
	DLEP peers. DLEP peers are comprised of a modem and a router. DLEP		DLEP peers. DLEP peers are comprised of a modem and a router. DLEP
	defines a base set of mechanisms as well as support for possible		defines a base set of mechanisms as well as support for possible
	extensions. This document defines one such extension.		extensions. This document defines one such extension.
	The base DLEP specification does not include any flow control		The base DLEP specification does not include any flow control
	capability. There are various flow control techniques theoretically		capability. There are various flow control techniques theoretically
	possible with DLEP. For example, a credit-window scheme for		possible with DLEP. This document defines a DLEP extension which
	destination-specific flow control which provides aggregate flow		provides a DiffServ-based flow control mechanism for traffic sent
	control for both modem and routers has been proposed in		from a router to a modem. Flow control is provided using one or more
	[I-D.ietf-manet-credit-window].		logical "Credit Windows", each of which will typically be supported
			by an associated virtual or physical queue. Traffic sent by a router
	This document defines a DLEP extension which provides a flow control		will use traffic flow classification information provided by the
	mechanism for traffic sent from a router to a modem. Flow control is		modem to identify which traffic is associated with each credit
	provided using one or more logical "Credit Windows", each of which		window. Credit windows may be shared or dedicated on a per flow
	will typically be supported by an associated virtual or physical		basis. See [I-D.berger-manet-dlep-ether-credit-extension] for an
	queue. Traffic sent by a router will use traffic flow classification		Ethernet-based version of credit window flow control.
	information provided by the modem to identify which traffic is
	associated with each credit window. (For general background on
	traffic classification see [RFC2475] Section 2.3.) Credit windows
	may be shared or dedicated on a per flow basis. The extension is
	structured to allow for reuse of the defined credit window based flow
	control with different traffic classification techniques.
	This document uses the traffic classification and credit window		This document uses the traffic classification and credit window
	control mechanisms defined in [I-D.ietf-manet-credit-flow-control] to		control mechanisms defined in
	provided credit window based flow control based on on DLEP		[I-D.ietf-manet-dlep-traffic-classification] and
	destination and DiffServ [RFC2475] DSCPs (differentiated services		[I-D.ietf-manet-dlep-credit-flow-control] to provided credit window
	codepoints). The defined mechanism allows for credit windows to be		based flow control based on on DLEP destination and DiffServ
	shared across traffic sent to multiple DLEP destinations and DSCPs,		[RFC2475] DSCPs (differentiated services codepoints). The defined
	or used exclusively for traffic sent to a particular destination and/		mechanism allows for credit windows to be shared across traffic sent
	or DSCP. The extension also supports the "wildcard" matching of any		to multiple DLEP destinations and DSCPs, or used exclusively for
	DSCP.		traffic sent to a particular destination and/or DSCP. The extension
			also supports the "wildcard" matching of any DSCP.
	The extension defined in this document is referred to as "DiffServ		The extension defined in this document is referred to as "DiffServ
	Aware Credit Window" or, more simply, the "DA Credit" extension. The		Aware Credit Window" or, more simply, the "DA Credit" extension. The
	reader should be familiar with both the traffic classification and		reader should be familiar with both the traffic classification and
	credit window control mechanisms defined in		credit window control mechanisms defined in
	[I-D.ietf-manet-credit-flow-control].		[I-D.ietf-manet-dlep-traffic-classification] and
			[I-D.ietf-manet-dlep-credit-flow-control].
	This document defines a new DLEP Extension Type Value in Section 2		This document defines a new DLEP Extension Type Value in Section 2
	which is used to indicate support for the extension.		which is used to indicate support for the extension.
	1.1. Key Words		1.1. Key Words
	The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",		The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
	"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and		"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
	"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP		"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
	14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all		14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
	capitals, as shown here.		capitals, as shown here.
	2. Extension Usage and Identification		2. Extension Usage and Identification
	The extension defined in this document is composed of the mechanisms		The extension defined in this document is composed of the mechanisms
	and processing defined in [I-D.ietf-manet-credit-flow-control]. To		and processing defined in
	indicate that the DiffServ Aware Credit Window Extension is to be		[I-D.ietf-manet-dlep-traffic-classification] and
	used, an implementation MUST include the DiffServ Aware Credit Window		[I-D.ietf-manet-dlep-credit-flow-control]. To indicate that the
	Type Value in the Extensions Supported Data Item. The Extensions		DiffServ Aware Credit Window Extension is to be used, an
			implementation MUST include the DiffServ Aware Credit Window Type
			Value in the Extensions Supported Data Item. The Extensions
	Supported Data Item is sent and processed according to [RFC8175].		Supported Data Item is sent and processed according to [RFC8175].
	Any implementation that indicates use of the DiffServ Aware Credit		Any implementation that indicates use of the DiffServ Aware Credit
	Window Extension MUST support all Messages, Data Items, the DiffServ		Window Extension MUST support all Messages, Data Items, the DiffServ
	Traffic Classification Sub Data Item, and all related processing		Traffic Classification Sub Data Item, and all related processing
	defined in [I-D.ietf-manet-credit-flow-control].		defined in [I-D.ietf-manet-dlep-traffic-classification] and
			[I-D.ietf-manet-dlep-credit-flow-control].
	The DiffServ Aware Credit Window Extension Type Value is TBA1, see		The DiffServ Aware Credit Window Extension Type Value is TBA1, see
	Section 5.		Section 5.
	3. Management Considerations		3. Management Considerations
	This section provides several network management guidelines to		This section provides several network management guidelines to
	implementations supporting the DiffServ Aware Credit Window		implementations supporting the DiffServ Aware Credit Window
	Extension.		Extension.
	skipping to change at page 4, line 22 ¶		skipping to change at page 4, line 22 ¶
	a router, the router MAY use a subset of the provided credit windows.		a router, the router MAY use a subset of the provided credit windows.
	Alternatively, a router MAY reset the session and indicate that the		Alternatively, a router MAY reset the session and indicate that the
	extension is not supported. In either case, the mismatch of		extension is not supported. In either case, the mismatch of
	capabilities SHOULD be reported to the user via normal network		capabilities SHOULD be reported to the user via normal network
	management mechanisms, e.g., user interface or error logging.		management mechanisms, e.g., user interface or error logging.
	4. Security Considerations		4. Security Considerations
	This document defines a DLEP extension that uses base DLEP mechanisms		This document defines a DLEP extension that uses base DLEP mechanisms
	and the credit window control and flow mechanisms defined in		and the credit window control and flow mechanisms defined in
	[I-D.ietf-manet-credit-flow-control]. The use of those mechanisms,		[I-D.ietf-manet-dlep-traffic-classification] and
	and the introduction of a new extension, do not inherently introduce		[I-D.ietf-manet-dlep-credit-flow-control]. The use of those
	any additional threats above those documented in [RFC8175]. The		mechanisms, and the introduction of a new extension, do not
	approach taken to Security in that document applies equally to the		inherently introduce any additional threats above those documented in
	mechanism defined in this document.		[RFC8175]. The approach taken to Security in that document applies
			equally to the mechanism defined in this document.
	5. IANA Considerations		5. IANA Considerations
	This document requests one assignment by IANA. All assignments are		This document requests one assignment by IANA. All assignments are
	to registries defined by [RFC8175].		to registries defined by [RFC8175].
	5.1. Extension Type Value		5.1. Extension Type Value
	This document requests 1 new assignment to the DLEP Extensions		This document requests 1 new assignment to the DLEP Extensions
	Registry named "Extension Type Values" in the range with the		Registry named "Extension Type Values" in the range with the
	skipping to change at page 5, line 6 ¶		skipping to change at page 5, line 6 ¶
	| Code | Description |		| Code | Description |
	+------+------------------------------+		+------+------------------------------+
	| TBA1 | DiffServ Aware Credit Window |		| TBA1 | DiffServ Aware Credit Window |
	+------+------------------------------+		+------+------------------------------+
	Table 1: Requested Extension Type Value		Table 1: Requested Extension Type Value
	6. References		6. References
	6.1. Normative References		6.1. Normative References
	[I-D.ietf-manet-credit-flow-control]		[I-D.ietf-manet-dlep-credit-flow-control]
	IETF, "DLEP Credit-Based Flow Control Messages and Data		Cheng, B., Wiggins, D., and L. Berger, "DLEP Credit-Based
	Items", April 2018.		Flow Control Messages and Data Items", draft-ietf-manet-
			dlep-credit-flow-control-02 (work in progress), June 2018.
			[I-D.ietf-manet-dlep-traffic-classification]
			Cheng, B., Wiggins, D., and L. Berger, "DLEP Traffic
			Classification Data Item", August 2018.
	[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>.
	[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC		[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
	2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,		2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
	May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.		May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
	[RFC8175] Ratliff, S., Jury, S., Satterwhite, D., Taylor, R., and B.		[RFC8175] Ratliff, S., Jury, S., Satterwhite, D., Taylor, R., and B.
	Berry, "Dynamic Link Exchange Protocol (DLEP)", RFC 8175,		Berry, "Dynamic Link Exchange Protocol (DLEP)", RFC 8175,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC8175, June 2017,		DOI 10.17487/RFC8175, June 2017,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8175>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8175>.
	6.2. Informative References		6.2. Informative References
	[I-D.ietf-manet-credit-window]		[I-D.berger-manet-dlep-ether-credit-extension]
	Ratliff, S., "Credit Windowing extension for DLEP", draft-		Wiggins, D. and L. Berger, "DLEP IEEE 802.1Q Aware Credit
	ietf-manet-credit-window-07 (work in progress), November		Window Extension", draft-berger-manet-dlep-ether-credit-
	2016.		extension-00 (work in progress), May 2018.
	[RFC2475] Blake, S., Black, D., Carlson, M., Davies, E., Wang, Z.,		[RFC2475] Blake, S., Black, D., Carlson, M., Davies, E., Wang, Z.,
	and W. Weiss, "An Architecture for Differentiated		and W. Weiss, "An Architecture for Differentiated
	Services", RFC 2475, DOI 10.17487/RFC2475, December 1998,		Services", RFC 2475, DOI 10.17487/RFC2475, December 1998,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2475>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2475>.
	Appendix A. Acknowledgments		Appendix A. Acknowledgments
	The sub data item format was inspired by Rick Taylor's "Data Item		The sub data item format was inspired by Rick Taylor's "Data Item
	Containers". He also proposed the separation of credit windows from		Containers". He also proposed the separation of credit windows from
	skipping to change at page 5, line 44 ¶		skipping to change at page 6, line 4 ¶
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2475>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2475>.
	Appendix A. Acknowledgments		Appendix A. Acknowledgments
	The sub data item format was inspired by Rick Taylor's "Data Item		The sub data item format was inspired by Rick Taylor's "Data Item
	Containers". He also proposed the separation of credit windows from		Containers". He also proposed the separation of credit windows from
	traffic classification at IETF98. Many useful comments were received		traffic classification at IETF98. Many useful comments were received
	from contributors to the MANET working group.		from contributors to the MANET working group.
	Authors' Addresses		Authors' Addresses
	Bow-Nan Cheng		Bow-Nan Cheng
	Lincoln Laboratory		MIT Lincoln Laboratory
	Massachusetts Institute of Technology		Massachusetts Institute of Technology
	244 Wood Street		244 Wood Street
	Lexington, MA 02421-6426		Lexington, MA 02421-6426
	Email: bcheng@ll.mit.edu		Email: bcheng@ll.mit.edu
	David Wiggins		David Wiggins
	Lincoln Laboratory		MIT Lincoln Laboratory
	Massachusetts Institute of Technology		Massachusetts Institute of Technology
	244 Wood Street		244 Wood Street
	Lexington, MA 02421-6426		Lexington, MA 02421-6426
	Email: David.Wiggins@ll.mit.edu		Email: David.Wiggins@ll.mit.edu
	Lou Berger		Lou Berger
	LabN Consulting, L.L.C.		LabN Consulting, L.L.C.
	Email: lberger@labn.net		Email: lberger@labn.net
End of changes. 16 change blocks.
	50 lines changed or deleted		55 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/