Stateless Best Effort Multicast Simulations
draft-chen-pim-be-mrh-simu-03
| Document | Type | Active Internet-Draft (individual) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Huaimo Chen , Donald E. Eastlake 3rd , Mike McBride , Yanhe Fan , Gyan Mishra , Yisong Liu , Aijun Wang , Xufeng Liu , Lei Liu | ||
| Last updated | 2024-03-28 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-chen-pim-be-mrh-simu-03
Network Working Group H. Chen
Internet-Draft D. Eastlake
Intended status: Standards Track M. McBride
Expires: 29 September 2024 Futurewei
Y. Fan
Casa Systems
G. Mishra
Verizon
Y. Liu
China Mobile
A. Wang
China Telecom
X. Liu
IBM Corporation
L. Liu
Fujitsu
28 March 2024
Stateless Best Effort Multicast Simulations
draft-chen-pim-be-mrh-simu-03
Abstract
This document describes simulations of stateless best effort
Multicasts and lists a set of simulation results for different large
network sizes and different tree sizes.
Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119] [RFC8174]
when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.
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/.
Chen, et al. Expires 29 September 2024 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft BE Multicast Simulation March 2024
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 29 September 2024.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2024 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 Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Simulations of BE Multicasts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Some Simulation Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1. Introduction
For a tree given by its root/ingress and leaves/egresses, a few of
solutions are proposed to multicast data from the ingress to the
egresses using the shortest IGP paths to the egresses. They include:
o BEM-MRH: Stateless Best Effort Multicast Using MRH
[I-D.chen-pim-be-mrh].
o BIER: Multicast Using Bit Index Explicit Replication [RFC8279].
o RGB: RGB (Replication through Global Bitstring) Segment for
Multicast Source Routing over IPv6 [I-D.lx-msr6-rgb-segment].
Chen, et al. Expires 29 September 2024 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft BE Multicast Simulation March 2024
This document describes simulations of stateless best effort
Multicasts and lists a set of simulation results for different large
network sizes and different tree sizes.
1.1. Acronyms
The following acronyms are used in this document:
CE: Customer edge/equipment.
MRH: Multicast Routing Header.
P2MP: Point 2 Multi-Point.
PE: Provider Edge.
2. Simulations of BE Multicasts
A simulation of a BE Multicast means a computation of the encoding of
a tree in a given network according to the BE Multicast. The tree
has a number of egresses/leaves, which is the size of the tree. The
network has a number of nodes, which is the size of the network.
For a given network size (i.e., a number of nodes in the network), we
assume that half of the nodes are PEs. For a given tree size (i.e.,
a number of leaves/egresses) T, we select T egress nodes from the PEs
randomly first. And then we compute the encoding of the tree with
these T selected egress nodes. The computation results include the
total size of the encoding of the tree and the number of packet
copies that the ingress/root of the tree will encapsulate and send.
For simulating Stateless Best Effort Multicast Using MRH (BEM-MRH)
defined in [I-D.chen-pim-be-mrh], we compute the encoding according
to BE-MRH for each of the trees with different tree sizes in each of
the networks with different network sizes.
3. Some Simulation Results
Suppose that we have a set of network sizes netSizes = {4096, 8192,
16384} and a set of tree sizes treeSizes = {16, 24, 32, 48, 64, 80,
96, 128}. We simulate the BEM-MRH and BIER for each tree size in
treeSizes for each network size in netSizes. For BIER, we use
BitString length 256 (bits).
Figure 1 shows the results of simulating the BEM-MRH and BIER for
every tree size for network size 4096.
Chen, et al. Expires 29 September 2024 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft BE Multicast Simulation March 2024
+======+=========================+=========================+
| | BEM-MRH | BIER |
| Tree | Encoding |Number of | Encoding |Number of |
| Size | Size |Packet Copies | Size |Packet Copies |
+======+==========+==============+==========+==============+
| 16 | 32 | 1 | 224 | 7 |
+------+----------+--------------+----------+--------------+
| 24 | 47 | 1 | 256 | 8 |
+------+----------+--------------+----------+--------------+
| 32 | 62 | 1 | 256 | 8 |
+------+----------+--------------+----------+--------------+
| 48 | 93 | 1 | 256 | 8 |
+------+----------+--------------+----------+--------------+
| 64 | 128 | 1 | 256 | 8 |
+------+----------+--------------+----------+--------------+
| 80 | 154 | 1 | 256 | 8 |
+------+----------+--------------+----------+--------------+
| 96 | 164 | 1 | 256 | 8 |
+------+----------+--------------+----------+--------------+
| 128 | 196 | 1 | 256 | 8 |
+======+==========+==============+==========+==============+
Figure 1: Results of simulating BEM-MRH and BIER for network with
4096 nodes
From the simulation results of BEM-MRH in the figure, we see that the
number of packet copies is 1 for any tree size (refer to the third
column of the table). This indicates that after receiving a
multicast packet from a traffic source such as a CE, the ingress/root
of the tree can encapsulate one packet copy and send the packet to
the egress/leaf nodes of the tree through using BEM-MRH.
From the simulation results of BIER in the figure, we see that the
number of packet copies is 7 for tree size 16 and 8 for any other
tree size (refer to the last column of the table). This indicates
that after receiving a multicast packet from a traffic source such as
a CE, the ingress/root of the tree need to make 7/8 packet copies,
encapsulate each of the copies and send the packet copies to the
egress/leaf nodes of the tree through using BIER.
From the simulation results of BEM-MRH in the figure, we see that the
total size of the encoding tree is 32 (bytes) for a tree with 16
leaves/egresses, 47 (bytes) for a tree with 24 leaves/egresses, ...,
196 (bytes) for a tree with 128 leaves/egresses (refer to the second
column of the table). The total size of the encoding tree is always
less than or equal to two times the tree size.
Chen, et al. Expires 29 September 2024 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft BE Multicast Simulation March 2024
From the simulation results of BIER in the figure, we see that the
total size of the encoding tree is 224 (bytes) for a tree with 16
leaves/egresses, and 256 (bytes) for any other tree size (refer to
the fourth column of the table).
Figure 2 shows the results of simulating the BEM-MRH and BIER for
every tree size for network size 8192.
+======+=========================+=========================+
| | BEM-MRH | BIER |
| Tree | Encoding |Number of | Encoding |Number of |
| Size | Size |Packet Copies | Size |Packet Copies |
+======+==========+==============+==========+==============+
| 16 | 32 | 1 | 320 | 10 |
+------+----------+--------------+----------+--------------+
| 24 | 48 | 1 | 352 | 11 |
+------+----------+--------------+----------+--------------+
| 32 | 64 | 1 | 416 | 13 |
+------+----------+--------------+----------+--------------+
| 48 | 96 | 1 | 448 | 14 |
+------+----------+--------------+----------+--------------+
| 64 | 124 | 1 | 512 | 16 |
+------+----------+--------------+----------+--------------+
| 80 | 159 | 1 | 512 | 16 |
+------+----------+--------------+----------+--------------+
| 96 | 187 | 1 | 512 | 16 |
+------+----------+--------------+----------+--------------+
| 128 | 235 | 1 | 512 | 16 |
+======+==========+==============+==========+==============+
Figure 2: Results of simulating BEM-MRH and BIER for network with
8192 nodes
From the simulation results of BEM-MRH in the figure, we see that the
number of packet copies is 1 for any tree size (refer to the third
column of the table). This indicates that after receiving a
multicast packet from a traffic source such as a CE, the ingress/root
of the tree can encapsulate one packet copy and send the packet to
the egress/leaf nodes of the tree through using BEM-MRH.
From the simulation results of BIER in the figure, we see that the
number of packet copies is from 10 to 16 for tree size from 16 to 128
(refer to the last column of the table). This indicates that after
receiving a multicast packet from a traffic source such as a CE, the
ingress/root of the tree need to make 10 to 16 packet copies,
encapsulate each of the copies and send the packet copies to the
egress/leaf nodes of the tree through using BIER.
Chen, et al. Expires 29 September 2024 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft BE Multicast Simulation March 2024
From the simulation results of BEM-MRH in the figure, we see that the
total size of the encoding tree is 32 (bytes) for a tree with 16
leaves/egresses, 48 (bytes) for a tree with 24 leaves/egresses, ...,
235 (bytes) for a tree with 128 leaves/egresses (refer to the second
column of the table). The total size of the encoding tree is always
less than or equal to two times the tree size.
From the simulation results of BIER in the figure, we see that the
total size of the encoding tree is from 320 to 512 (bytes) for a tree
with size from 16 to 128 (leaves/egresses) (refer to the fourth
column of the table).
Figure 3 shows the results of simulating the BEM-MRH and BIER for
every tree size for network size 16384.
+======+=========================+=========================+
| | BEM-MRH | BIER |
| Tree | Encoding |Number of | Encoding |Number of |
| Size | Size |Packet Copies | Size |Packet Copies |
+======+==========+==============+==========+==============+
| 16 | 32 | 1 | 384 | 12 |
+------+----------+--------------+----------+--------------+
| 24 | 48 | 1 | 480 | 15 |
+------+----------+--------------+----------+--------------+
| 32 | 64 | 1 | 704 | 22 |
+------+----------+--------------+----------+--------------+
| 48 | 96 | 1 | 800 | 25 |
+------+----------+--------------+----------+--------------+
| 64 | 126 | 1 | 896 | 28 |
+------+----------+--------------+----------+--------------+
| 80 | 158 | 1 | 928 | 29 |
+------+----------+--------------+----------+--------------+
| 96 | 192 | 1 | 992 | 31 |
+------+----------+--------------+----------+--------------+
| 128 | 256 | 1 | 1024 | 32 |
+======+==========+==============+==========+==============+
Figure 3: Results of simulating BEM-MRH and BIER for network with
16384 nodes
From the simulation results of BEM-MRH in the figure, we see that the
number of packet copies is 1 for any tree size (refer to the third
column of the table). This indicates that after receiving a
multicast packet from a traffic source such as a CE, the ingress/root
of the tree can encapsulate one packet copy and send the packet to
the egress/leaf nodes of the tree through using BEM-MRH.
Chen, et al. Expires 29 September 2024 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft BE Multicast Simulation March 2024
From the simulation results of BIER in the figure, we see that the
number of packet copies is from 12 to 32 for tree size from 16 to 128
(refer to the last column of the table). This indicates that after
receiving a multicast packet from a traffic source such as a CE, the
ingress/root of the tree need to make 12 to 32 packet copies,
encapsulate each of the copies and send the packet copies to the
egress/leaf nodes of the tree through using BIER.
From the simulation results of BEM-MRH in the figure, we see that the
total size of the encoding tree is 32 (bytes) for a tree with 16
leaves/egresses, 48 (bytes) for a tree with 24 leaves/egresses, ...,
256 (bytes) for a tree with 128 leaves/egresses (refer to the second
column of the table). The total size of the encoding tree is always
less than or equal to two times the tree size.
From the simulation results of BIER in the figure, we see that the
total size of the encoding tree is from 384 to 1024 (bytes) for a
tree with size from 16 to 128 (leaves/egresses) (refer to the fourth
column of the table).
4. Security Considerations
No.
5. IANA Considerations
No IANA is requested.
6. Acknowledgements
TBD
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[I-D.chen-pim-be-mrh]
Chen, H., 3rd, D. E. E., McBride, M., Fan, Y., Mishra, G.
S., Liu, Y., Wang, A., Liu, X., and L. Liu, "Stateless
Best Effort Multicast Using MRH", Work in Progress,
Internet-Draft, draft-chen-pim-be-mrh-04, 28 March 2024,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/api/v1/doc/document/draft-
chen-pim-be-mrh/>.
[I-D.lx-msr6-rgb-segment]
Liu, Y., Xie, J., Geng, X., and M. Chen, "RGB (Replication
through Global Bitstring) Segment for Multicast Source
Routing over IPv6", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,
Chen, et al. Expires 29 September 2024 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft BE Multicast Simulation March 2024
draft-lx-msr6-rgb-segment-05, 23 October 2023,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-lx-msr6-rgb-
segment-05>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC8200] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6
(IPv6) Specification", STD 86, RFC 8200,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8200, July 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8200>.
[RFC8279] Wijnands, IJ., Ed., Rosen, E., Ed., Dolganow, A.,
Przygienda, T., and S. Aldrin, "Multicast Using Bit Index
Explicit Replication (BIER)", RFC 8279,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8279, November 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8279>.
7.2. Informative References
[I-D.chen-pim-srv6-p2mp-path]
Chen, H., McBride, M., Fan, Y., Li, Z., Geng, X., Toy, M.,
Mishra, G. S., Wang, A., Liu, L., and X. Liu, "Stateless
SRv6 Point-to-Multipoint Path", Work in Progress,
Internet-Draft, draft-chen-pim-srv6-p2mp-path-09, 22
October 2023, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/
draft-chen-pim-srv6-p2mp-path-09>.
[I-D.ietf-pim-sr-p2mp-policy]
Voyer, D., Filsfils, C., Parekh, R., Bidgoli, H., and Z.
J. Zhang, "Segment Routing Point-to-Multipoint Policy",
Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-pim-sr-p2mp-
policy-07, 11 October 2023,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-pim-sr-
p2mp-policy-07>.
Authors' Addresses
Huaimo Chen
Futurewei
Boston, MA,
United States of America
Chen, et al. Expires 29 September 2024 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft BE Multicast Simulation March 2024
Email: hchen.ietf@gmail.com
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd
Futurewei
2386 Panoramic Circle
Apopka, FL, 32703
United States of America
Phone: +1-508-333-2270
Email: d3e3e3@gmail.com
Mike McBride
Futurewei
Email: michael.mcbride@futurewei.com
Yanhe Fan
Casa Systems
United States of America
Email: yfan@casa-systems.com
Gyan S. Mishra
Verizon
13101 Columbia Pike
Silver Spring, MD 20904
United States of America
Phone: 301 502-1347
Email: gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com
Yisong Liu
China Mobile
Email: liuyisong@chinamobile.com
Aijun Wang
China Telecom
Beiqijia Town, Changping District
Beijing
102209
China
Email: wangaj3@chinatelecom.cn
Chen, et al. Expires 29 September 2024 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft BE Multicast Simulation March 2024
Xufeng Liu
IBM Corporation
United States of America
Email: xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com
Lei Liu
Fujitsu
United States of America
Email: liulei.kddi@gmail.com
Chen, et al. Expires 29 September 2024 [Page 10]