ICE Multihomed and IPv4/IPv6 Dual Stack Fairness
draft-ietf-ice-dualstack-fairness-03
ICE P. Martinsen
Internet-Draft T. Reddy
Intended status: Best Current Practice P. Patil
Expires: December 12, 2016 Cisco
June 10, 2016
ICE Multihomed and IPv4/IPv6 Dual Stack Fairness
draft-ietf-ice-dualstack-fairness-03
Abstract
This document provides guidelines on how to make Interactive
Connectivity Establishment (ICE) conclude faster in multihomed and
IPv4/IPv6 dual-stack scenarios where broken paths exist. The
provided guidelines are backwards compatible with the original ICE
specification.
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 December 12, 2016.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 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
Martinsen, et al. Expires December 12, 2016 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft ICE Multihomed and DualStack Fairness June 2016
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Notational Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Improving ICE Multihomed Fairness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Improving ICE Dual Stack Fairness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7.1. ICE-Dual Stack Fairness Test code . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7.2. ICE-Dual Stack Fairness Test code . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1. Introduction
In multihomed and IPv4/IPv6 dual-stack environments ICE
[I-D.ietf-ice-rfc5245bis] would benefit by a fair distribution of its
connectivity checks across available interfaces or IP address types.
With a fair distribution of the connectivity checks, excessive delays
are avoided if a particular network path is broken or slow. It would
arguable be better to put the interfaces or address types know to the
application last in the checklist. However, the main motivation by
ICE is to make no assumptions regarding network topology, hence a
fair distribution of the connectivity checks is more appropriate. If
an application operates in a well-known environment is can safely
override the recommendation given in this document.
Applications should take special care to deprioritize network
interfaces known to provide unreliable connectivity when operating in
a multihomed environment. For example, certain tunnel services might
provide unreliable connectivity. Doing so will ensure a more fair
distribution of the connectivity checks across available network
interfaces on the device. The simple guidelines presented here
describes how to deprioritize interfaces known by the application to
provide unreliable connectivity.
There is also a need to introduce more fairness when handling
connectivity checks for different IP address families in dual-stack
IPv4/IPv6 ICE scenarios. Following the recommendations from RFC6724
[RFC6724] will lead to prioritization of IPv6 over IPv4 for the same
Show full document text