draft-ietf-manet-dlep-pause-extension-04.txt   draft-ietf-manet-dlep-pause-extension-05.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: December 17, 2018 L. Berger, Ed. Expires: September 12, 2019 L. Berger, Ed.
LabN Consulting, L.L.C. LabN Consulting, L.L.C.
June 15, 2018 March 11, 2019
DLEP Control Plane Based Pause Extension DLEP Control Plane Based Pause Extension
draft-ietf-manet-dlep-pause-extension-04 draft-ietf-manet-dlep-pause-extension-05
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 modem to use DLEP messages to pause and resume data traffic coming a modem to use DLEP messages to pause and resume data traffic coming
from its peer router. from its peer router.
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 December 17, 2018. This Internet-Draft will expire on September 12, 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 19 skipping to change at page 2, line 19
2. Extension Usage and Identification . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Extension Usage and Identification . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Extension Data Items . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Extension Data Items . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Queue Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.1. Queue Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1.1. Queue Parameter Sub Data Item . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.1.1. Queue Parameter Sub Data Item . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2. Pause . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.2. Pause . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.3. Restart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.3. Restart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.1. Extension Type Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.1. Extension Type Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.2. Data Item Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.2. Data Item Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.3. Queue Parameters Sub Data Item Values . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
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 data plane flow The base DLEP specification does not include any data plane flow
control capability. Various flow control methods are possible, e.g., control capability. Various flow control methods are possible, e.g.,
see [I-D.ietf-manet-credit-window]. The extension defined in this see [I-D.ietf-manet-dlep-da-credit-extension]. The extension defined
document supports flow control of data traffic based on explicit in this document supports flow control of data traffic based on
messages sent via DLEP by a modem to indicate when a router should explicit messages sent via DLEP by a modem to indicate when a router
hold off sending traffic, and when it should resume. The extension should hold off sending traffic, and when it should resume. The
also optionally supports DSCP (differentiated services codepoint) extension also optionally supports DSCP (differentiated services
aware, see [RFC2475], flow control. The extension defined in this codepoint) aware, see [RFC2475], flow control. The extension defined
document is referred to as "Control Plane Based Pause". Note that in this document is referred to as "Control Plane Based Pause". Note
this mechanism only controls traffic that is to be transmitted on the that this mechanism only controls traffic that is to be transmitted
modem's attached data channel and not to DLEP control messages on the modem's attached data channel and not to DLEP control messages
themselves. themselves.
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 the use of the extension, and three new which is used to indicate the use of the extension, and three new
DLEP Data Items in Section 3. DLEP Data Items in Section 3.
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
skipping to change at page 6, line 5 skipping to change at page 6, line 5
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
: ... | DS Field Qn | : ... | DS Field Qn |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Sub Data Item Type: Sub Data Item Type:
A 16-bit unsigned integer that indicates the type and A 16-bit unsigned integer that indicates the type and
corresponding format of the Sub Data Item's Value field. Sub Data corresponding format of the Sub Data Item's Value field. Sub Data
Item Types are scoped within the Data Item in which they are Item Types are scoped within the Data Item in which they are
carried, i.e., the Sub Data Item Type field MUST be used together carried, i.e., the Sub Data Item Type field MUST be used together
with the Data Item Type to identify the format of the Sub Data with the Queue Parameters Data Item Type to identify the format of
Item. This field MUST be set to one (1) for the Queue Parameter the Sub Data Item. This field MUST be set to one (1) for the
Sub Data Item. Queue Parameter Sub Data Item.
Length: Variable Length: Variable
Copying [RFC8175], Length is the number of octets in the sub data Length is the number of octets in the sub data item, excluding the
item, excluding the Type and Length fields. Type and Length fields.
Queue Index: Queue Index:
An 8-bit field indicating the queue index of the queue parameter An 8-bit field indicating the queue index of the queue parameter
represented in the sub data item. Only the first instance a a represented in the sub data item. Only the first instance of a
particular Queue Index value is meaningful. Subsequent sub data particular Queue Index value is meaningful. Subsequent sub data
items containing the same Queue Index values, if present, MAY be items containing the same Queue Index values, if present, MAY be
logged via a management interface and MUST otherwise be ignored. logged via a management interface and MUST otherwise be ignored.
Queue Size Qn: Queue Size Qn:
A 24-bit unsigned integer representing the size, in the octet A 24-bit unsigned integer representing the size, in the octet
scale indicated by the Scale field, of the queue supporting scale indicated by the Scale field, of the queue supporting
traffic with the DSCPs associated with the queue index. traffic with the DSCPs associated with the queue index.
Num DSCPs Qn: Num DSCPs Qn:
An 8-bit unsigned integer indicating the number of DSCPs An 8-bit unsigned integer indicating the number of DSCPs
associated with the queue index associated with the sub data item. associated with the queue index associated with the sub data item.
This field MUST contain a value of at least one (1). This field MUST contain a value of at least one (1).
DS Field Qn: DS Field Qn:
The data item contains a sequence of 8 bit DS Fields. The The data item contains a sequence of 8 bit DS Fields. The
position in the sequence identifies the associated queue index. position in the sequence identifies the associated queue index.
The number of DS Fields present should equal the sum of all Num The number of DS Fields present MUST equal the sum of all Num
DSCPs field values. DSCPs field values.
The DS Field structure is the same as [RFC2474]. The DS Field structure is the same as [RFC2474].
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
| DSCP | CU | | DSCP | CU |
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
DSCP: differentiated services codepoint DSCP: differentiated services codepoint
CU: currently unused, MUST be zero CU: currently unused, MUST be zero
3.2. Pause 3.2. Pause
The Pause Data Item is used by a modem to indicate to its peer that The Pause Data Item is used by a modem to indicate to its peer that
traffic is to be suppressed. An example of when a modem might send traffic is to be suppressed. An example of when a modem might send
this data item is when an internal queue length exceeds a particular this data item is when an internal queue length exceeds a particular
threshold. threshold.
A modem may indicate that traffic is to be suppressed on a device A modem can indicate that traffic is to be suppressed on a device
wide or destination specific basis. An example of when a modem might wide or destination specific basis. An example of when a modem might
use device wide indications is when output queues are shared across use device wide indications is when output queues are shared across
all destinations, and destination specific might be used when per all destinations, and destination specific might be used when per
destination queuing is used. To indicate that suppression applies to destination queuing is used. To indicate that suppression applies to
all destinations, a modem MAY send the Pause Data Item in a Session all destinations, a modem MUST send the Pause Data Item in a Session
Update Message. To indicate that suppression applies to a particular Update Message. To indicate that suppression applies to a particular
destination a modem MAY send the Pause Data Item in a Destination destination a modem MUST send the Pause Data Item in a Destination
Update Message. Update Message.
Each Pause Data Item identifies the traffic to be suppressed by the Each Pause Data Item identifies the traffic to be suppressed by the
Queue Index defined by Section 3.1, which in turn indicates a set of Queue Index defined by Section 3.1, which in turn indicates a set of
traffic identified by DSCPs. The special value of 255 is used to traffic identified by DSCPs. The special value of 255 is used to
indicate that all traffic is to be suppressed. indicate that all traffic is to be suppressed.
While there is no restriction on the number of Messages containing While there is no restriction on the number of Messages containing
Pause Data Item that may be sent by a modem, a modem SHOULD include Pause Data Item that may be sent by a modem, a modem SHOULD include
multiple queue indexes in the same message when possible. multiple queue indexes in the same message when possible.
skipping to change at page 8, line 28 skipping to change at page 8, line 28
3.3. Restart 3.3. Restart
The Restart Data Item is used by a modem to indicate to its peer that The Restart Data Item is used by a modem to indicate to its peer that
transmission of previously suppressed traffic may be resumed. An transmission of previously suppressed traffic may be resumed. An
example of when a modem might send this data item is when an internal example of when a modem might send this data item is when an internal
queue length drops below a particular threshold. queue length drops below a particular threshold.
The sending of this data item parallels the Pause Data Item, see the The sending of this data item parallels the Pause Data Item, see the
previous section, and follows the same rules. This includes that to previous section, and follows the same rules. This includes that to
indicate that transmission can resume to all destinations, a modem indicate that transmission can resume to all destinations, a modem
MAY send the Restart Data Item in a Session Update Message. It also MUST send the Restart Data Item in a Session Update Message. It also
includes that to indicate that transmission can resume to a includes that to indicate that transmission can resume to a
particular destination a modem MAY send the Pause Restart Item in a particular destination a modem MUST send the Pause Restart Item in a
Destination Update Message. Finally, the same rules apply to queue Destination Update Message. Finally, the same rules apply to queue
indexes. indexes.
A router which receives the Restart Data Item SHOULD resume A router which receives the Restart Data Item SHOULD resume
transmission of the identified traffic to the modem. transmission of the identified traffic to the modem.
The format of the Restart Data Item matches the Pause Data Item and The format of the Restart Data Item matches the Pause Data Item and
is: is:
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
skipping to change at page 9, line 16 skipping to change at page 9, line 16
Queue Index: See Section 3.2. Queue Index: See Section 3.2.
4. Security Considerations 4. Security Considerations
The extension introduces a new mechanism for flow control between a The extension introduces a new mechanism for flow control between a
router and modem using the DLEP protocol. The extension does not router and modem using the DLEP protocol. The extension does not
inherently introduce any additional threats above those documented in inherently introduce any additional threats above those documented in
[RFC8175]. The approach taken to Security in that document applies [RFC8175]. The approach taken to Security in that document applies
equally when running the extension defined in this document. equally when running the extension defined in this document.
Note that this extension does allow a compromised or impersonating
modem to suppress transmission by the router, but this is not a
substantively different threat by such a compromised modem simply
dropping all traffic destined to, or sent by a router. [RFC8175]
defines the use of TLS to protect against the impersonating attacker.
5. IANA Considerations 5. IANA Considerations
This document requests the assignment of 4 values by IANA. All This document requests the assignment of 4 values by IANA. All
assignments are to registries defined by [RFC8175]. assignments are 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
"Specification Required" policy. The requested value is as follows: "Specification Required" policy. The requested value is as follows:
skipping to change at page 10, line 17 skipping to change at page 10, line 17
+-----------+------------------+ +-----------+------------------+
| TBA2 | Queue Parameters | | TBA2 | Queue Parameters |
| | | | | |
| TBA3 | Pause | | TBA3 | Pause |
| | | | | |
| TBA4 | Restart | | TBA4 | Restart |
+-----------+------------------+ +-----------+------------------+
Table 2: Requested Data Item Values Table 2: Requested Data Item Values
5.3. Queue Parameters Sub Data Item Values
Upon approval of this document, IANA is requested to create a new
DLEP registry, named "Queue Parameters Sub Data Item Type Values".
The following table provides initial registry values and the
[RFC8126] defined policies that should apply to the registry:
+-------------+------------------------+
| Type Code | Description/Policy |
+-------------+------------------------+
| 0 | Reserved |
| | |
| 1 | Queue Parameter |
| | |
| 2-65407 | Specification Required |
| | |
| 65408-65534 | Private Use |
| | |
| 65535 | Reserved |
+-------------+------------------------+
Table 3
6. References 6. References
6.1. Normative References 6.1. 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>.
[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.ietf-manet-dlep-da-credit-extension]
Ratliff, S., "Credit Windowing extension for DLEP", draft- Cheng, B., Wiggins, D., and L. Berger, "DLEP DiffServ
ietf-manet-credit-window-07 (work in progress), November Aware Credit Window Extension", draft-ietf-manet-dlep-da-
2016. credit-extension-06 (work in progress), August 2018.
[RFC2474] Nichols, K., Blake, S., Baker, F., and D. Black, [RFC2474] Nichols, K., Blake, S., Baker, F., and D. Black,
"Definition of the Differentiated Services Field (DS "Definition of the Differentiated Services Field (DS
Field) in the IPv4 and IPv6 Headers", RFC 2474, Field) in the IPv4 and IPv6 Headers", RFC 2474,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2474, December 1998, DOI 10.17487/RFC2474, December 1998,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2474>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2474>.
[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>.
[RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.
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". Containers" idea.
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 02420-9108 Lexington, MA 02420-9108
Email: David.Wiggins@ll.mit.edu Email: David.Wiggins@ll.mit.edu
Lou Berger (editor) Lou Berger (editor)
LabN Consulting, L.L.C. LabN Consulting, L.L.C.
Email: lberger@labn.net Email: lberger@labn.net
 End of changes. 25 change blocks. 
37 lines changed or deleted 72 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/