IETF Recommendations Regarding Active Queue Management
draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation-09

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (aqm WG)
Last updated 2015-02-19 (latest revision 2015-01-13)
Replaces draft-baker-aqm-recommendation
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Best Current Practice
Formats pdf htmlized bibtex
Reviews
Stream WG state Submitted to IESG for Publication
Document shepherd Richard Scheffenegger
Shepherd write-up Show (last changed 2014-12-09)
IESG IESG state IESG Evaluation::AD Followup
Consensus Boilerplate Yes
Telechat date
Needs 8 more YES or NO OBJECTION positions to pass.
Responsible AD Martin Stiemerling
Send notices to rs@netapp.com, draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation.all@ietf.org, aqm@ietf.org, aqm-chairs@ietf.org
IANA IANA review state IANA OK - No Actions Needed
Network Working Group                                      F. Baker, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                             Cisco Systems
Obsoletes: 2309 (if approved)                          G. Fairhurst, Ed.
Intended status: Best Current Practice            University of Aberdeen
Expires: July 17, 2015                                  January 13, 2015

         IETF Recommendations Regarding Active Queue Management
                    draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation-09

Abstract

   This memo presents recommendations to the Internet community
   concerning measures to improve and preserve Internet performance.  It
   presents a strong recommendation for testing, standardization, and
   widespread deployment of active queue management (AQM) in network
   devices, to improve the performance of today's Internet.  It also
   urges a concerted effort of research, measurement, and ultimate
   deployment of AQM mechanisms to protect the Internet from flows that
   are not sufficiently responsive to congestion notification.

   The note largely repeats the recommendations of RFC 2309, and
   replaces these after fifteen years of experience and new research.

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 http://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 July 17, 2015.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2015 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

Baker & Fairhurst         Expires July 17, 2015                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft   Active Queue Management Recommendations    January 2015

   (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  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.1.  Congestion Collapse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.2.  Active Queue Management to Manage Latency . . . . . . . .   3
     1.3.  Document Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     1.4.  Changes to the recommendations of RFC2309 . . . . . . . .   5
     1.5.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   2.  The Need For Active Queue Management  . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     2.1.  AQM and Multiple Queues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     2.2.  AQM and Explicit Congestion Marking (ECN) . . . . . . . .  10
     2.3.  AQM and Buffer Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   3.  Managing Aggressive Flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   4.  Conclusions and Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     4.1.  Operational deployments SHOULD use AQM procedures . . . .  15
     4.2.  Signaling to the transport endpoints  . . . . . . . . . .  15
       4.2.1.  AQM and ECN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     4.3.  AQM algorithms deployed SHOULD NOT require operational
           tuning  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
     4.4.  AQM algorithms SHOULD respond to measured congestion, not
           application profiles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     4.5.  AQM algorithms SHOULD NOT be dependent on specific
           transport protocol behaviours . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
     4.6.  Interactions with congestion control algorithms . . . . .  20
     4.7.  The need for further research . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22
   7.  Privacy Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
   8.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24
   Appendix A.  Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  27
Show full document text