PIE: A Lightweight Control Scheme To Address the Bufferbloat Problem
draft-ietf-aqm-pie-08
The information below is for an old version of the document |
Document |
Type |
|
Active Internet-Draft (aqm WG)
|
|
Last updated |
|
2016-06-02
|
|
Replaces |
|
draft-pan-aqm-pie
|
|
Stream |
|
IETF
|
|
Intended RFC status |
|
Experimental
|
|
Formats |
|
plain text
pdf
html
bibtex
|
Stream |
WG state
|
|
Submitted to IESG for Publication
(wg milestone:
Dec 2015 - Submit first algorit...
)
|
|
Document shepherd |
|
Wesley Eddy
|
|
Shepherd write-up |
|
Show
(last changed 2016-04-21)
|
IESG |
IESG state |
|
Approved-announcement to be sent::AD Followup
|
|
Consensus Boilerplate |
|
Yes
|
|
Telechat date |
|
|
|
Responsible AD |
|
Mirja Kühlewind
|
|
Send notices to |
|
"Wesley Eddy" <wes@mti-systems.com>
|
IANA |
IANA review state |
|
Version Changed - Review Needed
|
|
IANA action state |
|
None
|
Internet Draft R. Pan, Cisco Systems
Active Queue Management P. Natarajan, Cisco Systems
Working Group F. Baker, Cisco Systems
Intended Status: Experimental Track G. White, CableLabs
Expires: December 2, 2016 May 31, 2016
PIE: A Lightweight Control Scheme To Address the
Bufferbloat Problem
draft-ietf-aqm-pie-08
Abstract
Bufferbloat is a phenomenon in which excess buffers in the network
cause high latency and jitter. As more and more interactive
applications (e.g. voice over IP, real time video streaming and
financial transactions) run in the Internet, high latency and jitter
degrade application performance. There is a pressing need to design
intelligent queue management schemes that can control latency and
jitter, and hence provide desirable quality of service to users.
This document presents a lightweight active queue management design,
called PIE (Proportional Integral controller Enhanced), that can
effectively control the average queueing latency to a target value.
Simulation results, theoretical analysis and Linux testbed results
have shown that PIE can ensure low latency and achieve high link
utilization under various congestion situations. The design does not
require per-packet timestamps, so it incurs very little overhead and
is simple enough to implement in both hardware and software.
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as
Internet-Drafts.
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."
Pan et al. Expires December 2, 2016 [Page 1]
INTERNET DRAFT PIE May 31, 2016
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
Copyright and License Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 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
(http://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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Design Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. The Basic PIE Scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1 Random Dropping(ECN Support is described later in this
document) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.2 Drop Probability Calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.3 Latency Calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.4 Burst Tolerance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. Optional Design Elements of PIE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.1 ECN Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.2 Dequeue Rate Estimation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.3 Setting PIE active and inactive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5.4 De-randomization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.5 Cap Drop Adjustment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6. Implementation Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7. Future Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
8. Incremental Deployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
11.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Pan et al. Expires December 2, 2016 [Page 2]
Show full document text