Skip to main content

Pre-Congestion Notification (PCN) Boundary-Node Behavior for the Single Marking (SM) Mode of Operation

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:


From: The IESG <>
To: IETF-Announce <>
Cc: RFC Editor <>,
    pcn mailing list <>,
    pcn chair <>
Subject: Document Action: 'PCN Boundary Node Behaviour for the Single Marking (SM) Mode of Operation' to Experimental RFC (draft-ietf-pcn-sm-edge-behaviour-12.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'PCN Boundary Node Behaviour for the Single Marking (SM) Mode of
  (draft-ietf-pcn-sm-edge-behaviour-12.txt) as an Experimental RFC

This document is the product of the Congestion and Pre-Congestion
Notification Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Martin Stiemerling and Wesley Eddy.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:

Ballot Text

Technical Summary

This document describes a possible boundary node behaviour
 for a PCN-domain (as defined in RFC 5559), known informally as
 the Single Marking (SM) PCN-boundary-node behaviour.
The behaviour described here is a form of measurement-based
load control using two PCN marking states: not-marked, and 

Working Group Summary

The document was subject to thorough review by the PCN working
group, and strong consensus for publication was reached.

The area director required substantial re-write of the document to address
a lack of operations and management considerations. 

IETF Last Call raised an issue about the lack of any standardized 
signaling protocol between the egress and ingress nodes. 
Subsequent work by the WG on one possible signaling protocol (RSVP)
was developed, but this protocol required an extension to RSVP.
This protocol work item was transferred from the PCN WG charter to the
TSVWG WG charter where most RSVP experts are active. The
document required a re-write to discuss operational considerations
for signaling protocols, and a suggestion that the RSVP extension
would be suitable in RSVP environments.

The logging description used enterprise-specific structured data rather
than standardized structured data, and the area director recommended this be changed,
which it was.

A second WGLC and a second IETF Last Call were performed, given
the extensive modifications to the document.

Document Quality

There are existing implementations of the protocol, and the
document cites research that has been done measuring the performance of 
this approach.

The document has been reviewed by the OPSDIR
The document has been reviewed by the SECDIR. No problems were identified.


   Document Shepherd: Steven Blake, PCN co-chair <>
   Responsible Area Director: Martin Stiemerling

RFC Editor Note