Packet Loss Signaling for Encrypted Protocols
draft-ferrieuxhamchaoui-quic-lossbits-02

• Status
• IESG evaluation record
• IESG writeups
• Email expansions
• History

• Versions
• 00
• 01
• 02

TSVWG                                                   A. Ferrieux, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                         I. Hamchaoui, Ed.
Intended status: Informational                               Orange Labs
Expires: May 6, 2020                                    I. Lubashev, Ed.
                                                     Akamai Technologies
                                                        November 3, 2019

             Packet Loss Signaling for Encrypted Protocols
                draft-ferrieuxhamchaoui-quic-lossbits-02

Abstract

   This draft adapts the general technique described in draft-
   ferrieuxhamchaoui-tsvwg-lossbits draft-ferrieuxhamchaoui-tsvwg-
   lossbits for QUIC using reserved bits in QUIC v1 header.  It
   describes a method that employs two bits to allow endpoints to signal
   packet loss in a way that can be used by network devices to measure
   and locate the source of the loss.

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 May 6, 2020.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2019 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

Ferrieux, et al.           Expires May 6, 2020                  [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                  loss-bits                  November 2019

   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   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.  Loss Bits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.1.  Setting the sQuare Bit on Outgoing Packets  . . . . . . .   3
       3.1.1.  Q Period Selection  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.2.  Setting the Loss Event Bit on Outgoing Packets  . . . . .   4
   4.  Using the Loss Bits for Passive Loss Measurement  . . . . . .   4
     4.1.  End-To-End Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.2.  Upstream Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.3.  Correlating End-to-End and Upstream Loss  . . . . . . . .   6
     4.4.  Downstream Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.5.  Observer Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   5.  Ossification Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   7.  Privacy Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   8.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     8.1.  Since version 01  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     8.2.  Since version 00  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   9.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   10. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     10.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     10.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9

1.  Introduction

   Packet loss is a hard and pervasive problem of day-to-day network
   operation, and proactively detecting, measuring, and locating it is
   crucial to maintaining high QoS and timely resolution of crippling
   end-to-end throughput issues.  To this effect, in a TCP-dominated
   world, network operators have been heavily relying on information
   present in the clear in TCP headers: sequence and acknowledgment
   numbers, and SACK when enabled.  These allow for quantitative
   estimation of packet loss by passive on-path observation.
   Additionally, the lossy segment (upstream or downstream from the
   observation point) can be quickly identified by moving the passive
   observer around.

   With QUIC, the equivalent transport headers are encrypted and passive