Anomalous Traffic Handling for DetNet
draft-han-detnet-anomalous-packets-handling-02

DetNet                                                            Z. Han
Internet-Draft                                                   R. Pang
Intended status: Standards Track                                  C. Liu
Expires: 2 September 2026                                   China Unicom
                                                                  J. Yan
                                                                  X. ZHU
                                                         ZTE Corporation
                                                            1 March 2026

                 Anomalous Traffic Handling for DetNet
             draft-han-detnet-anomalous-packets-handling-02

Abstract

   In deterministic networking (DetNet), strict resource reservation and
   scheduling assumptions may encounter anomalous traffic conditions at
   flow aggregation nodes due to microbursts, packet size variations, or
   control plane orchestration limitations.  These conditions represent
   deviations from the ideal deterministic service model rather than
   network faults.  Existing data plane mechanisms for handling
   anomalous packets, such as simple discarding or treating them as
   Best-Effort (BE) flows, are insufficient.  Consequently, the network
   performance can degrade to a level inferior to of traditional QoS
   approaches.Therefore, in order to handle the anomalous traffic, the
   data plane should implement an enhanced handling mechanism.

   This document proposes an enhanced anomalous traffic handling
   solution for DetNet.  This solution specifies two policies for
   handling traffic under anomalous conditions: the squeezing policy and
   the degrading policy.  These policies provide a flexible, enhanced
   mechanism applicable to various queuing mechanisms, ensuring the
   preferential scheduling and preservation of deterministic service
   traffic under anomalous conditions.

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/.

Han, et al.             Expires 2 September 2026                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft    Anomalous Traffic Handling for DetNet       March 2026

   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 2 September 2026.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2026 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  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Anomalous Condition Detection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   5.  Anomalous Traffic Handling Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     5.1.  Squeezing Policy  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     5.2.  Degrading Policy  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     5.3.  Squeezing Policy and Degrading Policy . . . . . . . . . .   9
   6.  Anomalous Traffic Handling Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     6.1.  Policy Selection and Configuration  . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     6.2.  Anomalous Information Reporting . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     6.3.  Anomalous Traffic Handling Procedure  . . . . . . . . . .  10
   7.  Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   8.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   9.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   10. Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   11. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     11.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14

Han, et al.             Expires 2 September 2026                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft    Anomalous Traffic Handling for DetNet       March 2026

1.  Introduction

   DetNet is capable of providing real-time application services with
   deterministic guarantees such as bounded latency, low jitter, and low
   packet loss rate, as per [RFC8655].  One of the major technologies of
   DetNet is resource allocation, as per [RFC8938], which reserves
   necessary resources for specified DetNet flows to mitigate packet
   loss and jitter caused by network congestion.  The control plane
   orchestrates the paths of DetNet flows to avoid resource conflicts.
   The data plane then transmits DetNet flows based on this
   orchestration result, employing mechanisms like traffic shaping, flow
   admission control, and forwarding information encapsulation to
   maintain the required QoS.

   Each node along the end-to-end path may serve as an aggregation node.
   Aggregated flows that belong to the same traffic class share the
   reserved resources at the outgoing port.  Ideally, the transmission
   of each flow within the same traffic class would strictly conform to
   the scheduling of the control plane, thereby meeting the strict
   deterministic requirements.  However, this ideal scenario is often
   difficult to achieve due to the diversity of deterministic flows—such
   as occasional microbursts and packet size fluctuations.  Allocating
   resources based on the maximum packet size may lead to resource
   waste, while basing them on the average size may cause resource
   conflicts.  Furthermore, software and hardware limitations can
   introduce additional discrepancies.  For instance, algorithmic flaws
   in the control plane may lead to resource conflicts in extreme cases,
   and high-priority protocol messages (e.g., ARP packets under abnormal
   conditions) in the data plane may preempt service packets, causing
   delays for lower-priority flows.

   To address these network anomalies, the control plane should properly
   schedule resources to avoid resource conflicts at the aggregation
   nodes.  As defined in [RFC8655], service protection solutions like
   PREOF (Packet Replication, Elimination, and Ordering Functions) are
   proposed based on multi-path transmission.  Although PREOF can
   prevent performance reduction by reserving a large amount of
   redundant resources for the specified service flows, this approach
   may lead to poor resource utilization and potentially diminishing the
   value proposition of deterministic technologies.  In the data plane,
   the existing mechanisms are relatively simple and primitive.  For
   example, the data plane may choose to discard packets directly or
   buffer them until the resources allocated to its traffic class become
   available.  Both of these approaches can result in Quality of Service
   (QoS) degradation that is even worse than that of Best-Effort (BE)
   flows.

Han, et al.             Expires 2 September 2026                [Page 3]
Internet-Draft    Anomalous Traffic Handling for DetNet       March 2026

   Therefore, an enhanced, automated mechanism for handling anomalous
   packets in the data plane is essential for the future implementation
   and application of deterministic network technology.

   This document proposes an enhanced anomalous packet handling policy
   and solution for DetNet, supporting two policies: packet squeezing
   and packet degrading, which can be enabled individually or in
   combination.  The control plane and users can configure the policies’
   activation and associated parameters.  Detailed procedures for
   implementing these policies across various queuing mechanisms are
   provided.

   While the examples in this document often reference time-slot-based
   mechanisms for clarity, the concepts of squeezing and degrading apply
   broadly to any DetNet queuing mechanism where:

   *  Resources are reserved based on traffic specifications;

   *  Temporary deviations from those specifications can occur;

   *  Graceful handling of such deviations is preferred over hard drops.

2.  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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119].

3.  Terminology

   The terminology is defined as [RFC8655].

   The following terminology is used in this document:

   Anomalous Traffic Condition: A temporary state where instantaneous
   traffic characteristics deviate from the resource reservation
   parameters established by the control plane.  Such conditions are
   normal operational behaviors (e.g., microbursts, packet size
   variations) but are anomalous relative to the strict deterministic
   service model.

Han, et al.             Expires 2 September 2026                [Page 4]
Internet-Draft    Anomalous Traffic Handling for DetNet       March 2026

4.  Anomalous Condition Detection

   The real-time detection in the data plane aims to identify anomalous
   forwarding behaviors that violate the resource reservation
   assumptions of the deterministic service model.  When an anomaly
   condition is detected, enhanced processing policies, such as packet
   squeezing and packet degrading, are applied to ensure the
   preferential scheduling of deterministic flows, even under abnormal
   conditions.

   This identifies situations where instantaneous traffic
   characteristics deviate from the parameters used during control plane
   resource reservation, potentially compromising deterministic
   guarantees.

   The detection process is closely associated with the queuing
   mechanisms employed.  In general, an anomaly is detected at a node
   when an arriving packet's designated queue has already exceeded its
   allocated resource limit (e.g., buffer depth or packet count) for the
   current scheduling cycle or timeslot.  Typically, for
   TQF[I-D.peng-detnet-packet-timeslot-mechanism], the target output
   timeslot of a packet at the current node can be determined by the
   upstream timeslot label and the basic timeslot mapping.  For
   EDF[I-D.peng-detnet-deadline-based-forwarding], the target output
   timeslot at the current node is calculated based on the budget and
   delay target carried in the packet.  Each output timeslot is
   associated with a queue.  When a packet arrives, it is enqueued in
   the corresponding queue.  For CQF, if the current scheduling timeslot
   is 1 and the target timeslot is 5, the packet for target output
   timeslot 5 will be placed into the corresponding queue preemptively.
   Before the packet enters the output queue, the queue depth is
   checked.  If it does not exceed the allowable packet capacity of the
   queue, the packet is enqueued normally.  If it exceeds the allowable
   capacity, it indicates an anomaly.

5.  Anomalous Traffic Handling Policy

   The proposed solution supports two enhanced anomalous traffic
   handling policies in the data plane:

   *  Squeezing Policy: Temporarily delays anomalous packets by
      “squeezing” them into the next timeslot while retaining their
      original scheduling information.

   *  Degrading Policy: Redirects anomalous packets to a lower-priority
      queue and modifies their scheduling parameters when the
      accumulation of anomalous packets exceeds a predefined threshold.

Han, et al.             Expires 2 September 2026                [Page 5]
Internet-Draft    Anomalous Traffic Handling for DetNet       March 2026

   These policies provide flexibility in activation: they can be enabled
   concurrently, individually, or disabled entirely.  If neither policy
   is enabled, the default mechanism, such as discarding the packets or
   treating them as a BE flow, will be utilized.

5.1.  Squeezing Policy

   The data plane can support the squeezing policy through the
   configuration of the squeezing threshold.  When anomalous traffic
   causes the queue occupancy to exceed its allocated capacity—but
   remains below the squeezing threshold—the system applies the
   squeezing policy.  Specifically, the system enqueues packets ubder
   anomalous conditions and records the number of squeezed bits.
   According to the squeezing policy, packets that cannot be sent within
   the allocated time are squeezed into the next timeslot until the
   queue is emptied.  The squeezing policy is compatible with various
   queuing mechanisms; however, the implementation details will vary
   depending on the specific mechanism utilized.

   Assume that each timeslot permits 4000 bits, and the squeezing
   threshold is set to 2000 bits.  Consider a service flow where the
   size of each packet is fixed at 1000 bits.  Packets 1 to 4 are
   assigned to timeslot 1, while packets numbered 5 to 7 are assigned to
   timeslot 2.  Due to the presence of aggregated traffic, assume that
   the current depth of queue 1 is 2000 bits.

Han, et al.             Expires 2 September 2026                [Page 6]
Internet-Draft    Anomalous Traffic Handling for DetNet       March 2026

       |<----timeslot1---->|<----timeslot2---->|<----timeslot3---->|
       +---------+---------+-------------------+-------------------+
       |/////////|         |                   |                   |
       +---------+---------+-------------------+-------------------+

       packet sequence of the flow
       +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
       | P7 | P6 | P5 | P4 | P3 | P2 | P1 |     --->
       +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
       P1 P2 P3 P4 -> target timeslot ： 1
       P5 P6 P7    -> target timeslot ： 2

                                       |
                                       \/
               +---------+----+----+----+----+
       Queue 1 |/////////| P1 | P2 | P3 | P4 |
               +---------+----+----+----+----+
               +----+----+----+
       Queue 2 | P5 | P6 | P7 |
               +----+----+----+

       |-----timeslot1-----|-----timeslot2-----|-----timeslot3-----|
       +---------+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+--------------+
       |/////////| P1 | P2 | P3 | P4 | P5 | P6 | P7 |              |
       +---------+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+--------------+
                                               |<------->|
                                        squeezing threshold

    Figure 1: Squeezing policy based on timeslot-based queuing mechanism

   Figure 1 illustrates the processing of service flow packets numbered
   1 through 7.  Packets 1 and 2 are placed into Queue 1 (associated
   with timeslot 1).  Given the existing aggregated traffic, the
   addition of Packets 1 and 2 (totaling 2000 bits) causes Queue 1 to
   reach its allocated capacity of 4000 bits.  When Packets 3 and 4
   arrive, they are immediately identified as anomalous packets.

   Since the squeezing policy is enabled with a threshold of 2000 bits,
   Packets 3 and 4 are redirected to Queue 2, while retaining their
   original timeslot 1 label.  Based on the squeezing policy, packets 3
   and 4 are now squeezed into timeslot 2 for transmission.  At this
   point, the buffer depth of Queue 2 increases to 2000 bits.
   Subsequently, Packets 5, 6, and 7, which are targeted for timeslot 2,
   arrive and enter Queue 2.  However, when Queue 2 reaches its
   allocated capacity of 4000 bits, Packet 7 is marked as anomalous.
   Packet 7 is then enqueued in Queue 2 and squeezed for transmission in
   timeslot 3.

Han, et al.             Expires 2 September 2026                [Page 7]
Internet-Draft    Anomalous Traffic Handling for DetNet       March 2026

   At the aggregation node, continuous bursts may lead to successive
   squeezing, which could trigger a chain reaction.  Without safeguards,
   packets squeezed from one timeslot into the next may accumulate
   indefinitely, undermining deterministic transmission guarantees.  To
   prevent unbounded accumulation caused by consecutive squeezing, the
   following two safeguard mechanisms are introduced:

   *  Synchronization Threshold Mechanism: Defines a threshold (N) as
      the maximum number of consecutive timeslots permitted to be
      affected by squeezing.  If squeezing occurs over N consecutive
      slots, the current queue must be resynchronized with the timeslot
      schedule to restore consistency and prevent unlimited delay
      accumulation.

   *  Exponential Decay Mechanism: When consecutive squeezing occurs,
      the allowed squeezing capacity decays exponentially.
      Specifically, the first affected timeslot permits a predefined
      squeezing capacity T; for each subsequent consecutive timeslot,
      the allowed squeezing capacity is reduced by 50% of the previous
      slot.  This decay continues until the permitted capacity falls
      below the minimum packet size which then disallows further
      squeezing and triggering alternative handling (e.g., degrading).

|----timeslot1----|----timeslot2----|----timeslot3----|----timeslot4----|
|---------queue1---------|-----queue2------|----queue3-----|---queue4---|
|<--------------------------------------------------------------------->|
                            synchronization threshold

         Figure 2: Illustration of synchronization threshold

5.2.  Degrading Policy

   The data plane supports the degrading policy and allows for the
   configuration of its parameters.  This policy can be used either
   independently or in conjunction with the squeezing policy.

   *  When deployed with the squeezing policy, the degrading policy
      processes traffic under anomalous conditions that exceeds the
      squeezing threshold.

   *  When deployed independently, the degrading policy is applied
      directly to anomalous packets that exceed the allocated buffer
      capacity.

Han, et al.             Expires 2 September 2026                [Page 8]
Internet-Draft    Anomalous Traffic Handling for DetNet       March 2026

   For EDF, packets are processed by adjusting their target sending
   time.  The resultant delay time can be flexibly configured based on
   the congestion level at the outgoing port.  For TAS/CQF and their
   variations, packets are redirected to a lower priority queue.

5.3.  Squeezing Policy and Degrading Policy

   When both squeezing and degrading policies are enabled, the node
   shall perform the following steps:

   1.  Upon packet arrival, determine whether the packet is anomalous.

   2.  If the squeezed resource count is below the squeezing threshold
       T, apply the squeezing policy to process the packet.

   3.  If the squeezed resource count exceeds T (or if consecutive
       squeezing has reached the synchronization threshold N or the
       exponential decay limit), immediately trigger the degrading
       policy by modifying the packet’s internal scheduling parameters
       and redirecting it to the appropriate lower-priority queue.

6.  Anomalous Traffic Handling Solution

6.1.  Policy Selection and Configuration

   The following anomaly handling policies are defined in this document:

   *  Degrading Policy: Process packets according to the degrading
      policy, which includes treating the packets as BE flow.

   *  Squeezing Policy: This policy provides temporary capacity
      expansion to avoid data loss due to unexpected traffic.

   *  Postponement Policy: Delays the transmission of packets until the
      next scheduling cycle.

   *  Redirection Policy: Redirect packets to a regular QoS queue.

   *  Discarding Policy: Discard anomalous packets.

   If the squeezing or degrading policies are not enabled or are
   otherwise inapplicable, anomalous packets shall be processed by
   existing default methods, such as discarding.  When the data plane
   supports multiple anomalous packets handling policies, the enabled
   policies and related parameters shall be configured by the control
   plane.

Han, et al.             Expires 2 September 2026                [Page 9]
Internet-Draft    Anomalous Traffic Handling for DetNet       March 2026

6.2.  Anomalous Information Reporting

   Once the data plane automatically handles anomalies using the
   squeezing policy or the degrading policy, it should promptly report
   these anomalies to the controller.  This enables the controller to
   perceive detailed insights into the network anomalies and take
   appropriate actions, such as re-orchestration, flow entry re-
   configuration, resource expansion.  In addition to reporting to the
   controller, the data plane should also transmit the anomaly
   information to the downstream nodes.  This allows downstream nodes to
   adjust their forwarding behavior or restore the original parameters
   of the packets according to the received anomaly information.  The
   anomaly information reported by the data plane includes, but is not
   limited to:

   *  Basic information: node ID, port ID, etc.

   *  Anomalous condition information: flow ID and packet sequence
      number, etc.

   *  Anomalous traffic handling policy information:

      -  Policy Type: Specifies the handling policy employed (e.g.,
         squeezing, degrading, or default policies like discarding).

      -  Related parameters:

         o  For squeezing policy: Includes data such as the number of
            squeezed bits and the quantity of squeezed packets.

         o  For the degrading policy: Includes data such as the priority
            levels before and after degrading, and the number of
            degraded packets.

         o  For default policies: Includes information such as the
            number of discarded packets or treated as BE flows.

6.3.  Anomalous Traffic Handling Procedure

   When a node in the data plane receives a DetNet packet, it first
   checks for anomalies.  If an anomaly is detected, the node proceeds
   to handle the packet.

   1.  Identify Supported Policies.  The node determines which anomalous
       traffic handling policies are supported locally.

   2.  Policy-based Packet Processing.

Han, et al.             Expires 2 September 2026               [Page 10]
Internet-Draft    Anomalous Traffic Handling for DetNet       March 2026

       *  No Enhanced Policies Enabled: If the enhanced anomalous
          traffic handling policies (i.e., the squeezing policy and the
          degrading policy) are not enabled, the anomalous traffic shall
          be processed by the default mechanisms, such as direct
          discarding or treating the packets as Best-Effort (BE) flows.

       *  Single Policy Enabled: Process the anomalous packet using the
          enabled policy.

       *  Both Policies Enabled: If both the squeezing policy and
          degrading policy are enabled, the local node first checks
          whether the number of anomalous packets exceeds the squeezing
          threshold.  If not, the squeezing policy is applied;
          otherwise, the degrading policy is applied.

   3.  Information Transmission

   After processing the anomalous packets, the node SHOULD send the
   anomaly information to the controller and/or the downstream node.

7.  Example

   This example illustrates the anomaly detection and handling policy in
   the forwarding plane when the TQF is employed.

   It is assumed that TQF mechanism supports three cycles (A, B, and C)
   at the egress ports.  The timeslot size increases in powers of 2
   while the number of timeslots decreases in powers of 2.  Cycle A
   supports eight queues, and in addition, a low-priority BE queue is
   provided.  For Cycle A, the timeslot mapping is defined as 0 -> 5;
   for the Cycle B, the mapping is 0 -> 3.  It is assumed that each TQF
   timeslot in Cycle A allows a maximum capacity of 10,000 bits, Cycle B
   20,000 bits, and Cycle C 40,000 bits.  When the queue depth of Cycle
   A exceeds 10,000 bits, it indicates that an abnormal condition has
   occurred.

   Furthermore, the control plane is configured to enable the squeezing
   policy on the forwarding plane with a squeezing threshold set to
   15,000 bits and to enable the degrading policy, which is configured
   in a stepwise degrading mode.

   Consider a certain service flow where each packet is 1,000 bits in
   size.  Packets 1 to 10 use Cycle A and carry a timeslot value of 0;
   packets with sequence numbers 11 to 15 also use Cycle A, but carry a
   timeslot value of 2.  When packet 1 arrives at the node, the current
   queue depth of timeslot 5 is 8,000 bits, and that of timeslot 7 is 0
   bits.

Han, et al.             Expires 2 September 2026               [Page 11]
Internet-Draft    Anomalous Traffic Handling for DetNet       March 2026

   Processing Procedure:

    packet sequence (from right to left)
    +---+---+---+---+---+---+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
    |P15|P14|P13|P12|P11|P10|P9|P8|P7|P6|P5|P4|P3|P2|P1|   --->
    +---+---+---+---+---+---+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
    P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 : Cycle A timeslot 0->5
    P11 P12 P13 P14 P15 ：Cycle A timeslot 2->7
                                    |
                                    \/
    Cycle A
            +-----------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
    queue 5 |///////////|P1|P2|P3|P4|P5|P6|P7|
            +-----------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
            +---+---+---+---+---+
    queue 7 |P11|P12|P13|P14|P15|
            +---+---+---+---+---+

    Cycle B
            +--+--+---+
    queue 3 |P8|P9|P10|
            +--+--+---+

    Cycle A
    |------timeslot5------|------timeslot6------|------timeslot7------|
    +---------------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+------+---+---+---+---+---+-|
    |///////////////|P1|P2|P3|P4|P5|P6|P7|      |P11|P12|P13|P14|P15| |
    +---------------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+------+---+---+---+---+---+-|

    Cycle B
    ---timeslot2----------|-----------------timeslot3-----------------|
    +---------------------+--+--+---+---------------------------------+
    |                     |P8|P9|P10|                                 |
    +---------------------+--+--+---+---------------------------------+

         Figure 3: Example of Using the Anomalous Packets Handling
                             Mechanism with TQF

Han, et al.             Expires 2 September 2026               [Page 12]
Internet-Draft    Anomalous Traffic Handling for DetNet       March 2026

   When packets 1 and 2 are enqueued into queue 5 according to the Cycle
   A timeslot mapping 0 -> 5, the depth of queue 5 reaches 10,000
   bits.Upon the arrival of packet 3, if it were to be enqueued using
   the same mapping (0 -> 5), the queue depth would exceed the
   10,000-bit threshold, thereby indicating the presence of anormaly.
   Since the squeezing policy is enabled with a threshold of 15,000
   bits, packets 3 to 7 are processed in squeezing mode and are enqueued
   into queue 5, retaining their original output timeslot label 5.

   When packet 8 arrives, enqueuing it in queue 5 would cause the
   cumulative bits to exceed the 15,000-bit squeezing threshold.
   Consequently, the degrading policy is triggered.  Packets 8 to 10 are
   degraded from Cycle A to Cycle B.  Based on the Cycle A transmission
   timeslot value(0) carried in the packet, which is converted to Cycle
   B transmission timeslot 0, the Cycle B mapping (0 → 3) is applied.
   Thus, packets 8–10 are enqueued into Cycle B’s Queue 3.  Packets 11
   to 15 mapped using timeslot 2 -> 7, are enqueued normally as the
   queue depth remains within the 10,000-bit capacity.

8.  Security Considerations

   TBA

9.  IANA Considerations

   TBA

10.  Acknowledgements

   TBA

11.  References

11.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.peng-detnet-deadline-based-forwarding]
              Peng, S., Du, Z., Basu, K., cheng, Yang, D., and C. Liu,
              "Deadline Based Deterministic Forwarding", 13 October
              2025, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-peng-
              detnet-deadline-based-forwarding-18>.

   [I-D.peng-detnet-packet-timeslot-mechanism]
              Peng, S., Liu, P., Basu, K., Liu, A., Yang, D., and G.
              Peng, "Timeslot Queueing and Forwarding Mechanism", 12
              October 2025, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/
              draft-peng-detnet-packet-timeslot-mechanism-13>.

Han, et al.             Expires 2 September 2026               [Page 13]
Internet-Draft    Anomalous Traffic Handling for DetNet       March 2026

   [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>.

   [RFC8655]  Finn, N., Thubert, P., Varga, B., and J. Farkas,
              "Deterministic Networking Architecture", RFC 8655,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8655, October 2019,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8655>.

   [RFC8938]  Varga, B., Ed., Farkas, J., Berger, L., Malis, A., and S.
              Bryant, "Deterministic Networking (DetNet) Data Plane
              Framework", RFC 8938, DOI 10.17487/RFC8938, November 2020,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8938>.

Authors' Addresses

   Zhengxin Han
   China Unicom
   Beijing
   China
   Email: hanzx21@chinaunicom.cn

   Ran Pang
   China Unicom
   Beijing
   China
   Email: pangran@chinaunicom.cn

   Chang Liu
   China Unicom
   Beijing
   China
   Email: liuc131@chinaunicom.cn

   Jinjie Yan
   ZTE Corporation
   China
   Email: yan.jinjie@zte.com.cn

   Xiangyang Zhu
   ZTE Corporation
   China
   Email: zhu.xiangyang@zte.com.cn

Han, et al.             Expires 2 September 2026               [Page 14]