Enabling application policy-awareness in Multipath QUIC
draft-an-multipath-quic-application-policy-00
QUIC Q. An
Internet-Draft Alibaba Inc.
Intended status: Standards Track Z. Li
Expires: January 7, 2021 ICT-CAS
Y. Liu
Alibaba Inc.
July 6, 2020
Enabling application policy-awareness in Multipath QUIC
draft-an-multipath-quic-application-policy-00
Abstract
This document describes an application policy-awareness method for
Multipath QUIC, to enable taking applications' demands into account
when managing paths or scheduling packets in Multipath QUIC.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 7, 2021.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
An, et al. Expires January 7, 2021 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft multipath-quic-application-policy July 2020
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Notational Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. What is Application Policy-awareness in Multipath QUIC . . . 3
4. Per-connection Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Per-stream Intent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1. Introduction
The availability of multiple network interfaces in devices enables
the use of multiple paths between two end points for robust and
(possibly) fast data delivery. Multi-path TCP (MPTCP) was designed
to leverage off such an availability. It has been adopted by
operating systems and ISPs. A major design principle of MPTCP is
that it must be usable by applications through existing SOCKET APIs.
That said, it shields the underlying multiple paths for the
applications, which may be not even aware the use of multiple path
transmission. While this implements the backward compatibility with
TCP, it also leaves the applications out of the control loop of the
transport. Nevertheless, applications may have completely different
QoE requirements---the interactive applications are delay sensitive,
while the video streaming are more throughput sensitive. There is
thus a trend of cross-layer design that tries to take applications'
demands into account when managing paths or scheduling packets in
MPTCP [MP-DASH][WN][AD-MPTCP][SMAPP].
We thus advocate the idea of application policy awareness in multi-
path transport, which is to separate the 'control plane' from the
`data plane' like in software defined networking. The 'control
plane' takes applications' high-level demands (a.k.a intent) as input
to generate the corresponding policies, which later are deployed on
the 'data plane'. The 'data plane' maps users policies to the
'actions', which control the path management, packet scheduling and
other functionalities that the transport implements. For instance,
the 'actions' for path management may include "backup", "full mesh"
and "ndiffports", while the 'actions' for packet scheduling may
designate whether ECF [ECF] or DEMS [BSC] is used for path selection,
and may also impose a traffic split ratio among paths. Each
connection then can have a customized multipath transport.
Show full document text