DECoupled Application Data Enroute (DECADE) Problem Statement
draft-ietf-decade-problem-statement-05

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (decade WG)
Authors Haibin Song  , Ning Zong  , Y. Yang  , Richard Alimi 
Last updated 2012-03-29 (latest revision 2012-02-07)
Replaces draft-song-decade-problem-statement
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Informational
Formats pdf htmlized (tools) htmlized bibtex
Reviews
Stream WG state WG Document
Document shepherd Richard Woundy
IESG IESG state Approved-announcement to be sent
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date
Responsible AD Martin Stiemerling
IESG note Richard Woundy (richard_woundy@cable.comcast.com) is the document shepherd.
Send notices to decade-chairs@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-decade-problem-statement@tools.ietf.org
DECADE                                                           H. Song
Internet-Draft                                                   N. Zong
Intended status: Informational                                    Huawei
Expires: August 11, 2012                                         Y. Yang
                                                         Yale University
                                                                R. Alimi
                                                                  Google
                                                        February 8, 2012

     DECoupled Application Data Enroute (DECADE) Problem Statement
                 draft-ietf-decade-problem-statement-05

Abstract

   Peer-to-peer (P2P) applications have become widely used on the
   Internet today and make up a large portion of the traffic in many
   networks.  In P2P applications, one technique for reducing the
   transit and uplink P2P traffic is to introduce storage capabilities
   within the network.  Traditional caches (e.g., P2P and Web caches)
   provide such storage, but they are complex (due to explicitly
   supporting individual P2P application protocols and cache refresh
   mechanisms) and they do not allow users to manage access to content
   in the cache.  For example, content providers wishing to use in-
   network storage cannot easily control cache access and resource usage
   policies to satisfy their own requirements.  This document discusses
   the introduction of in-network storage for P2P applications, and
   shows the need for a standard protocol for accessing this storage.

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 August 11, 2012.

Copyright Notice

Song, et al.             Expires August 11, 2012                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft          DECADE Problem Statement           February 2012

   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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Terminology and Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  The Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     3.1.  P2P infrastructural stress and inefficiency  . . . . . . .  4
     3.2.  P2P cache: a complex in-network storage  . . . . . . . . .  5
     3.3.  Ineffective integration of P2P applications  . . . . . . .  6
   4.  Usage Scenarios  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     4.1.  BitTorrent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     4.2.  Content Publisher  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   5.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     5.1.  Denial of Service Attacks  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     5.2.  Copyright and Legal Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     5.3.  Traffic Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     5.4.  Modification of Information  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     5.5.  Masquerade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     5.6.  Disclosure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     5.7.  Message Stream Modification  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   6.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   7.  Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   8.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   Appendix A.  Other Related Work in IETF  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Song, et al.             Expires August 11, 2012                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft          DECADE Problem Statement           February 2012

1.  Introduction

   P2P applications, including both P2P streaming and P2P filesharing
Show full document text