A Loss-Latency Trade-off Signal for the Mobile Network
draft-fossati-tsvwg-lola-00

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2018-12-16
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
Network Working Group                                         T. Fossati
Internet-Draft                                                     Nokia
Intended status: Standards Track                            G. Fairhurst
Expires: June 19, 2019                            University of Aberdeen
                                                     P. Aranda Gutierrez
                                        Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
                                                           M. Kuehlewind
                                                              ETH Zurich
                                                       December 16, 2018

         A Loss-Latency Trade-off Signal for the Mobile Network
                      draft-fossati-tsvwg-lola-00

Abstract

   This document proposes a marking scheme for tagging low-latency flows
   (for example: interactive voice and video, gaming, machine to machine
   applications) that is safe to use by the mobile network for matching
   such flows to suitable per-hop behaviors (EPS bearers defined by
   3GPP) in its core and radio segments.  The suggested scheme re-uses
   NQB, a DiffServ-based signalling scheme with compatible rate-delay
   trade-off semantics that has been recently introduced in the context
   of fixed access to allow differential treatment of non-queue building
   vs queue building flows.

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 June 19, 2019.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

Fossati, et al.           Expires June 19, 2019                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft            Loss-Latency Tradeoff            December 2018

   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
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  DiffServ Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Marking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   5.  Relationship to a Mobile DiffServ Domain  . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  On Remarking and Bleaching  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   8.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   9.  Privacy Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   10. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   11. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     11.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     11.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6

1.  Introduction

   Today's mobile networks are configured to bundle all flows to and
   from the Internet into a single "default" EPS bearer whose buffering
   characteristics are not compatible with low-latency traffic.  The
   established behaviour is partly rooted in the desire to prioritise
   operators' voice services over competing over-the-top services.  Of
   late, said business consideration seems to have lost momentum and the
   incentives might now be aligned towards allowing a more suitable
   treatment of Internet real-time flows.  However, a couple of
   preconditions need to be satisfied before we can move on from the
   status quo.  First, the real-time flows must be efficiently
   identified so that they can be quickly assigned to the "right" EPS
   bearer.  This is especially important with the rising popularity of
   encrypted and multiplexed transports, which has the potential of
   increasing the cost/accuracy ratio of Multi-Field (MF) based
   classification over the acceptable threshold.  Second, the signal
Show full document text